For those with digital radios in the fire service

The General forum is where users can discuss any topic regarding Motorola communications equipment - hardware, software, etc. There are also several focused forums on this board, so please take the time to ensure that your questions doesn't fall into one of those categories before posting here!

Moderator: Queue Moderator

Post Reply
ai4ui
was kf4pxz
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:07 pm

For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ai4ui »

IAFC Digital Problem Working Group Produces
Best Practices Presentation

Fairfax, Va., June 2, 2008... The IAFC Portable Radio Best Practices presentation has just been posted for download to the IAFC website at http://www.iafc.org/digitalproblem. Publication of this guide follows a year of extensive study of current practices supported by laboratory testing. A summary of the background on this report follows.

Last year, the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) formed a working group composed of fire-service personnel, other public-safety representatives, wireless-radio manufacturers, manufacturers of fire apparatus and equipment and consultants to address potential problems found in digital radios in the presence of loud background noise. The IAFC has been working in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Commerce to develop reliable data to address the extent and nature of the problem.

A meeting of the IAFC working group was held in Boulder, Colo., May 21-22 at the NIST/NTIA laboratories to review the data presented by our federal partners.

A final report from the IAFC will be published in June to put the laboratory data into public-safety context, with observations and recommendations for fire chiefs, EMS directors and law-enforcement leadership. It’s important to recognize that while raw data from approved, scientific laboratory procedures is invaluable, the technical results need to be fully understood as to how they pertain to emergency-services operations.

Prior to the final report being released, the IAFC is moving forward with this PowerPoint presentation to share operational best practices related to portable radios. These best practices will provide useful information for the most effective and safest use of portable radios in a fire-service environment. While originally focusing on digital radios, it was determined that the presentation had valuable information for all types of portable radios, both analog and digital. The guide is located at http://www.iafc.org/digitalproblem.
Wyrd bið ful ãræd, Fate is inexorable...
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

Not for nothing but... Seriously?!?!?! They spent a year to come to a conclusion that we've been doing in for analog for YEARS.

"Don't use the PASS alarm while talking."... Well no sh!t! Anyone with 3 brain cells in the same compartment knows that the pass alarm will override even Micheal Jackson's or any Mother-In-Law's voice in a confined environment. We changed or SOP's YEARS ago. (We are Conventional, Simplex, Analog.) It's a training process. A simple "If, Then" training. If you can't reach us via portable radio after 2 rapid tries, then activate PASS. HOLY COW! FORM A COMMITTEE!!!!

and not for nothing... I'd like to see them try not to scream into the mic when CRAP hits the fan. In the words of George Carlin referencing the statement during am airline safety lecture, after being told to place the oxygen mask over your head and breathe normally... "I have no problem with that. I always breathe normally when I'm in a 600mile an hour, uncontrolled, vertical dive. I also sh!t normally. RIGHT IN MY PANTS!"

What a bunch of dweebs...

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
User avatar
Wowbagger
Aeroflex
Posts: 1287
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:46 am

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by Wowbagger »

IANAFF, so I'd like to ask a couple of questions of those who are:

Reading the linked info, it sounds like the SCBA gear doesn't have a mike in the mask - is that true? If so, why not? It seems to me that would greatly help filter out all the other fireground noise (only the SCBA and PASS would get into the mike).
This is my opinion, not Aeroflex's.

I WILL NOT give you proprietary information. I make too much money to jeopardize my job.

I AM NOT the Service department: You want official info, manuals, service info, parts, calibration, etc., contact Aeroflex directly, please.
ai4ui
was kf4pxz
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:07 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ai4ui »

TPG: Please don't shoot the messager. I am passing on something I thought folks who have digital radios needed to know. I don't believe I will be able to train my crew completely around faulty technology.

Wowbagger: My dept. uses Scott packs. They did come with a voice amplifier but it cost extra. The biggest problem is the vibrating facepiece low pressure alarm. The vocoder doesn't seem to know what to make of it so nothing intelligable comes out the other end. If you are lost, trapped, and low on air no one will be able to understand you as you try to call for help or tell people where you are. It is that big of a deal and someone is going to die because of it.


RG

<edited for format because it was originally posted froma phone>
Last edited by ai4ui on Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Wyrd bið ful ãræd, Fate is inexorable...
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

I'm not shooting you, I'm disappointed in the IAFC. In their presentation, name an action that is specific to digital, that doesn't also effect analog. What they are suggesting is common sense applications and what we've been doing for years.

"Application #1 Use the radio before PASS." Yes, this holds true for any communication, digital OR analog.

"Application #2 Hold the mic 2-3 inches from the face piece mic port" Yup, same is true for analog. Also, the voice amplifiers are great for person to person communications, but DISTORT to holy hell on the radio. We train to use the non-amplified voice port for radio comms.

"Application #3 Speak in a loud, clear, and controlled voice to maximize audio intelligibility." Ok... we'll stop slurring on purpose now. You caught us...

"Application #4 Shield the microphone from noise sources to improve the intelligibility of the audio in high noise environments" Again, we have to do that in analog already. Turning your head away from the noise, covering the open area by the mic with your other hand. Once again, not digital specific.

"Application #5 When practical consider using a free hand to muffle a mask mask-mounted SCBA low air alarm when trying to transmit on a radio" See #4 comments

"Application #6 Consideration should be given to the location of radios and microphones in relation to PASS devices and other noise generating user equipment" See #1 Comments.

I'm not saying there ISN'T a problem with digital. I'm just pissed that THIS is what came out of it. Not, "we found a technical flaw in the codec design and are working on re-engineering it." or some other BS. If there truly is a problem with Digital, then you won't be able to train around it.

Wowbagger: I WISH they would come up with an integrated mic INSIDE the face piece. They already have heads-up display for air level. You'd only need one or two more wires for mic audio. Then sell adapters for the specific radio. Seems easy to me, but still don't see it even on the new stuff. Time will tell.

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
res6cue
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by res6cue »

McKay makes an in-ear mic/speaker that is worth looking into.

http://www.mckayproducts.com/store/Tactical.htm
talviar
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by talviar »

Wowbagger wrote:IANAFF, so I'd like to ask a couple of questions of those who are:

Reading the linked info, it sounds like the SCBA gear doesn't have a mike in the mask - is that true? If so, why not? It seems to me that would greatly help filter out all the other fireground noise (only the SCBA and PASS would get into the mike).
15 years ago I think the cost to add in mask mic on an MSA mask was $500 per mask + the interface box and interface cable. I think we spent $1500 per mask to outfit with the interface and cable to the radio. At the time we were spending around $3500 per mask (1 hour hi pressure cylinder) This setup gave the most intelligibility out of anything we have played with (analog FM on 453.525 MHz) We also had a high failure rate on these as the connection on the bottom of the mask was flimsy and non repairable. Wire pulled out of the mask and you pretty much had to replace a $500 module to fix it (replaced 3 of those-in 4 years-masks were under light use for a hazmat team). Interface boxes were sealed units so non repairable when broke. Had 2 fail and pretty much looked at other means of communications.

It is basic economics. . . . . With mask costs increasing and average cost I think is around $5000-5500 per mask now-a-days + cost of the mask hook ups that are very pricey it is tough for many departments to justify the cost of the setups.

Just my $1.95 and ymmv. . . .

Tony
Last edited by talviar on Thu Jun 05, 2008 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
ai4ui
was kf4pxz
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:07 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ai4ui »

It's not even a digital vs. analog issue per say, but more of a design issue. Doing tests comparing older non-vocoded Bendix-King EPH radios vs. Motorola XTS3000s in either analog or digital mode, the firefighter was always unintelligable when using the XTS radio while the vibrating face piece low pressure alarm was active. It did not matter. We could always find a way to get around other noises like PASS, fire alarms, power tools, pony motors, etc., but the Scott vibrating face piece low pressure alarm was always a failure. With the BK radios, they could be understood while the vibrating facepiece was active. OTOH, fire alarms, small engines & PASS alarms just about kill the BK radios, but the firefighter could be understood while using the XTS in digital.

What I love is the fast, annoyed eye blinking from the chief as i described the problem to him.

Go figure...

RG
Wyrd bið ful ãræd, Fate is inexorable...
Nexrad16
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 8:01 pm
What radios do you own?: APX V/7 & V/U Liberty

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by Nexrad16 »

Pager Geek,

We could have use your "expertise" in our testing while continuing to do our full-time careers. Sorry we did not meet your expectations. NIST and the entire public safety profession could benefit from your input. Thanks for your opinion no matter how uninformed.

Respecfully,

Paul Roberts
IAFC Digital Problem Testing Group Chair
City of Boise Fire Department
208.378.8517 Office

On a more positive note for the readers. I had a chance to hold the Thales Liberty today in Washington D.C. and I must say that it appears, feels & sounds (analog/digital with no noise for the "expert") to be a very capable radio! I look forward to testing the Liberty in Boise in VHF, UHF, 700 & 800 (trunk) later this summer. I will let you all know what we find.


P.S. Watch for the actual NIST report on the digital issue to be posted tomorrow on the ITS website.
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

"No matter how uninformed"... hahahaha... cute.

I work for an MSS, and I'm a full-time firefighter / paramedic, volly FD captain, and vice chair of the county communications committee appointed by the county legislature, elected by my peers. Whooptie f'in doo..

I'm a radio user who is a firefighter. Plain and simple. If you guys are "concerned" with digital technology and fireground communications why not address the noticeable differences between analog and digital, and how to correct the digital inadequacies. This may be as simple as a programming technique, user setting, compatible hardware or as complicated as redesigning codec or the technology altogether. Again, digital vs analog. After all, poor communications using digital technology is what has everybody's panties in a bunch, correct? If what you put out solves the digital issues, then you are saying there aren't any problems, and it's user error.

Being the IAFC, you should have unlimited resources such as manufacturers engineering, technical SME's, multiple large agencies (LAFD, FDNY, Phoenix, etc) able to test various circumstances multiple times to assist in data gathering for said engineers. After all that, we get "Speak loud and clear" ?!?!?

I truly hope the NIST report has some "value added" features.

And you're welcome for my opinion. I hope it was sarcastically helpful in some twisted manner... after all, I'm a firefighter first.

In all seriousness, at the end of the day I'm LOOKING FORWARD to actual solutions to solve these various digital issues. I am anxious to see some differences in "before and after" from where you started to whatever the answer is. That will show the true impact of the working groups, and their influence.

Good luck
tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

If you are reading all these links and keeping up with the issues. You will see that the Best Practices Report is ONE of three parts of the total report. Best Practices, is just that, Best Practices to use the radio, program the radio, and spec a system. Then there will be the NIST study, which will be posted today. It is the scientific part of the document. Then there is an IAFC paper to basically bring the two together with an executive summary that spells it all out in layman's terms. This process if far from over. There were many things identified in this process that we want to look at more and continue the testing effort, which will be defined in the next few months.


ads
User avatar
MTS2000des
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:59 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS2500, XTS5000, and MTS2000

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by MTS2000des »

I don't think it takes an engineer to realize that there is a serious operational issue with the P25 CAI codec. I've said it before, I don't think digital is ready for prime time in public safety. Blaming it on "user error" is not an acceptable solution to a life safety problem. If an overhaul of the codec is the answer, than it is going to be yet another expensive road to travel for all of us. Ancillary equipment such as face mask microphones, audio transducers, etc are but yet a band aid to an inherent inadequacy of the codec to properly send transmitted audio to the receiving end without distorting it into oblivion.

We never had these issues with standard FM. A firefighter has already died in the LOD. Tombstone technology seems to be an SOP. And that is unacceptable to me.
The views here are my own and do not represent those of anyone else or the company, the boss, his wife, his dog or distant relatives.
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

Again, read the links and reports. No where does it blame the problem on user error. They are Best Practices for use in ALL modes. Reading the links and reports would also show you that many problems were identified, one of which was that there was very little training being done on proper radio usage. That was the basis of developing BP. Pay attention to how others around you use there radio, you will notice that the vast majority don't use best practices.
There was also several open calls for practitioner help through, participating in the actual test, submit training ideas, or any other valuable opinion. Many comments have been made on this board and others that may agree or disagree with the test, problem, etc. But with few exceptions on here none have actually participated in helping with the problem, only bashing it before its released.


http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ntia-rpt/08-453/

ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

Hmmm... how to put this....

BP Report / Material: D+ (Bad timing, Nothing new that effectively solves the digital problem)
NIST Report: A+ (Quantifies and substantiates the problem)
Executive Summary: TBD

I know there are multiple groups. Yes, I have been following it. Personally, I wouldn't have put the BP material out before the NIST or Executive summary. Demonstrate an actual problem (NIST Report) THEN suggest solutions. Based on the material in the best practices report, the suggestions should have been considered reminders, not solutions. User habits won't solve a true technology flaw. They may attempt to minimize the flaw, but what was listed wasn't anything that can't be found in a radio's user manual. Also, none of the suggestions were specific to the digital problem (which is the heart of the group.) As for the technical solution of "be involved in your communications system design" isn't solving the digital issue either. Nor is "consult your manufacturer", since they always say "What problem? That's just how it is." And you know something??... they're half right! It is how digital is. NIST just proved that.

Since both of you seem (one for sure) to be on this workgroup... PLEASE do us the favor and recommend a solution that SOLVES the issue. Even if it's new technology, SOMETHING other than user habits (unless it does completely solve it.) Otherwise, say digital is not meant for fireground use and be done with it.

As for the "open calls" for help. I'm already too busy "with my full-time job", and there are more educated techno-weenies out there that can re-engineer it from top to bottom that will completely solve this problem. Or perhaps not. The problem has been identified and substantiated, now it's time to solve it.

So, we get to sit back and see what the final answers are from those that have time to do this....

Once again, good luck.

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

Pager Geek, yes we are both very heavily involved in the DPWG and the radio issues in general for Public Safety.

In respect to the poor grade for the BP. Reread the form post and links. One of the MAIN problems found by the NIST/DPWG research was poor radio use and practices. This causes both modes problems. Its also very easily corrected with some simple training guidelines. We found VERY few agencies that were doing any intensive training on radios. We also found very few manufacturers who had proper documentation on how to use the radio for the best possible transmission and intelligibility. Keep in mind there are many systems in place that can't run analog. With that being said the most important thing that can be done that will eliminate a LARGE portion of the digital problem is proper radio use. So the most important thing to get out was the training portion. If they could have all been released at the same time, we would have. But ethically we wouldn't want to hold back some common sense training issues that we had documented were not being used, just so we could release them all at the same time. We wanted the BP out there ASAP and the rest would be released when they were done, no sooner, no later.

If you want us to say Digital Bad, Analog Good, its not going to happen. The mode of the radio is ONE of MANY issues to consider when having to make that choice. Does Analog outperform Digital in respect to intelligibility when comparing apples to apples, absolutely, and the test back it up. If your building a system from the ground up and have a choice to make, is analog the choice, yes if your looking for the highest quality audio across the range of best case to worst case, yes. But very few choices are that easy, some are adding onto a system, some are already on a digital only systems, some have poor coverage on older analog and great coverage on new digital. So you see you have to take ALL the issues in, and make an informed decision.


As for solving the problem, believe me there are BILLIONS of dollars on the line here and first to market is generally first to win. There is a ton of work being done right now to do just that , solve the problem not patch it. We are both being used very heavily right now as sounding boards for companies with ideas on a fix.

Believe me, neither of us are techno-weenies. To quote a friend we are Radio-Abusers not users. But thats what it takes to help the industry build a better radio for us. We have found that very little and in some cases NO research was done by some of the companies with practitioners prior to building a product that was "specifically designed for Public Safety"????

This document was not designed to be the "final report" it was designed to be the baseline for use to improve upon. We are already deep into planning the next phases of testing and expanding what we are doing to further the safety of our fellow brothers.


and BTW the Liberty is the BOMB,



ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

I'm going to make some points (like always) but keep in mind, I'm NOT shooting down digital. I'm only going after potentially flawed perceptions.
NIST Report wrote: "In environment 3 (SCBA mask with no additional background noise), the two analog systems effectively maintain the NFPA 1981-2007 goal of 80%[footnote 7]
intelligibility through a mask, while the digital systems were 52% for the P25 Full
Rate vocoder system and 59% for the P25 Enhanced Full Rate vocoder system."
This is flat out a technology flaw. There is no user variance in this test. I can't train to avoid this and I can't say "well since we have digital radios, you can't use your mask."
NIST Report wrote: NIST Report regards to Environment 5 (SCBA Mask with 2 PASS alarms sounding):"The 25 kHz Analog FM performed significantly better than either of the two digital systems."
Analog=58%
P25 FR=15%
P25 EFR=21%
If 10% or less is completely unintelligible, I KNOW I'll be able to hear someone analog, but will most likely not be able to in digital. Once again this is a technology problem, not user interface.

Also, for you to make a statement "If you want us to say Digital Bad, Analog Good, its not going to happen" is pretty bold. That's a hard stand when it comes to FF lives. If it TRUELY is a cause of a life safety concern, let people know. It's like the locking collars on the SCBA bottles. It took a few people to rub on something and shut them off before the change occurred. It HAD to be changed. The list goes on where we have to admit a flaw to prevent injury / death and to move forward.

I'm all for technology, that's why I'm into radios. I can also accept a slight audio degradation for forward progress overall. We've all grown accustom to changes. I can "retrain" my ears for digital, but if it's technically impossible for me to hear, it's a PROBLEM!

I know the money involved, but you are putting a $ sign on a life. Are you REALLY willing to take a position that digital is acceptable if it costs someone's life in the end? You're putting yourself in EXACTLY that spot. You are the IAFC, not a manufacturer. Us fire guys would be more apt to listen to you after unbiased testing than a radio salesman.

food for thought...

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

TPG you are still missing the point to some extent. Its not as easy as a simple yes or no answer. You make the choice below.


You have to pick one of the two options. The systems are in-place and functioning, and no you cant just buy a new one and upgrade it to your specs.

Analog system with aging equipment and 60% coverage in car with high gain antenna. With this system communications on TRS is virtually impossible inside more substantial buildings.

Or

Brand new system straight P25 digital with a tested coverage area of 98.75% coverage with unity gain antenna IN BUILDING.


Thats the choice many agencies face. Remember this problem just came to the forefront in the last year or two. Most of these "new" systems were spec'ed long before that then build outs were finished a year or two after spec'ing. So in the above scenario is Digital Bad? No its more complicated than that. So in the above are you going to choose Futo put Public Safety agencies on a system that will make it very difficult to communicate every time they walk in building or a Digital system where they can communicate but have to over come the "digital issue"

Thats why I said in a true apples to apples comparison. YES digital outperforms analog and should be the only choice for Public Safety. But to make the statement unqualified like you suggest would not be very smart on our part since there are specific instances where people may have to choose digital for various reasons as shown.

Your other statements about Scenario Three and Five. You are misunderstanding the report. You cannot read that as 59% of ALL communications are intelligible. We know that in the absence of substantial ambient noise or mask the quality of communications is virtually the same. So there was no need to test those quieter environments other than for two baselines. The test is designed to show how radios perform in there "worst" environments not "all" environments. Scenario three was singled out since showed some unexpected results.

Further to imply that we aren't looking out for firefighters safety, quite frankly offends me? Paul is one of the main reasons this issue has been brought to the level of attention it is now. Believe me if it wasn't for him and the IAFC, you would be hearing NOTHING about this from the industry. They would still be selling the digital is great cool-aid.


ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

Ok. We're doing good. Same end, just different views.

I'm going to work backwards to address 3 things. I may be a little pointed, but that's just who I am. Don't take offense, it's not you personally.

Topic 1: I never said that you didn't care about firefighter's lives. In fact, I KNOW that's why this is being done. My point is to make sure that the reason why you say digital is OK isn't because of the financial impact of the outcome. That's all. Plain and simple.

Topic 2: Scenario 3 and 5. I know these are specific tests for those specific enviroments. HOWEVER, these are the MOST CRITICAL environments to be in! I NEED to be able to communicate with my FF's inside if something is going wrong. Those instances include Low air alarms and PASS alarms. To be perfectly honest, I'm not really worried about talking from FF to FF from sidewalk to sidewalk. I NEED to know what they are telling me with a PASS alarm alarming in the background, or if their low air alarm going off. THAT'S my issue. These events are the MOST critical on a fireground. Wouldn't you agree? I know that digital isn't bad all the time, but the time I need to BE SURE I can communicate is proven impossible by the NIST tests.

Topic 3: Systems. Here's the blunt part. IT'S NOT FOR YOU TO DECIDE! The task of the digital workgroup was to quantify and substantiate the complaints of digital inadequecies for fireground communications. PERIOD. You have done that. NIST report says it all. (Most of the ime it's ok, with exception to certain circumstances.) I understand you may want to make recommendations, but it's not your overall role. Let the AHJ and the manufacturer who sold the system solve these problems. You CAN'T possibly know every system in operation, along with its shortcomings. I have an to answer your question, but my overall operations are ENTIRELY different than yours. Yes, I still put the blue stuff on the red stuff... but I'm talking about overall system use. For you guys to try to solve SYSTEM problems isn't within your scope, expertise or authority.

You have proven that in certain scenarios, digital will not provide good communications for life safety events. Stick with that. You will be better sticking to that than trying to bite off more than you SHOULD be chewing.

But, to solve your question in BOTH scenarios. For BEST firefighter safety during fireground operations.... Conventional, Simplex, Analog. It's all in the programming.

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
User avatar
n7maq
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2001 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: Mocom 70 w/scan!!

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by n7maq »

The Pager Geek wrote: But, to solve your question in BOTH scenarios. For BEST firefighter safety during fireground operations.... Conventional, Simplex, Analog. It's all in the programming.

tpg

Bottom line, Tim stated the best answer.....
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

Exactly. The test wasn't testing Trunked vs Conventional, Simplex vs. Duplex, it was just testing Analog vs Digital. Thats why we keep saying over and over there is way more to consider than just the Analog vs Digital issue. Locally we operate in analog trunked with a very high coverage map, with protocols that we go off the TRS in poor coverage areas. The problems with doing that are recording the fireground as it was heard on the scene, which can be done with remote "listening"sites. And under most systems with analog conventional you lose PTT ID and Emergency Status. I think over the next few years you will see lots of agencies go back to analog conventional operational grounds since its easy to do local recording and you can easily do PTT ID with Emergency status.

ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

ads47 wrote:Exactly. The test wasn't testing Trunked vs Conventional, Simplex vs. Duplex, it was just testing Analog vs Digital. Thats why we keep saying over and over there is way more to consider than just the Analog vs Digital issue.
Correct. You were just testing analog vs digital. You have proven that in certain circumstances (that happen to be life safety issues) Digital is not adequate for effective fireground communications, REGARDLESS of system performance. There is a life safety concern with digital.

The system could have perfect 100% coverage, but because of a technology limitation, digital is putting FFs at risk.

Based on the NIST results, answer these questions:
1: If a firefighter comes upon 2 activated PASS alarms and tried to communicate via Digital (with PERFECT system coverage, even simplex) will he be heard?
Answer: Probably not (15% P25 Full Rate)

2: If a firefighter tries to communicate with his SCBA mask on via Digital (with PERFECT system coverage, even simplex) will he be heard?
Answer: 50/50 shot (52% P25 Full Rate)

3: Would I be able to hear the above 2 circumstances in Analog (with PERFECT system coverage, even simplex)?
Answer: Yes, Most Likely. (60% of the time for PASS alarm question, and 80% of the time for SCBA masks)

Conclusion: Digital Bad, Analog good FOR THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. There is nothing user interface, or system design can do to overcome those instances. THAT'S A PROBLEM!

Call it how you see it.

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

TGP you have nailed it, Yes. Analog outperforms digital!. But with the data we cant say that across the board as a broad statement because so many people will misread it. As I have said before, in ANY apples to apples comparison analog outperforms digital. But because there are so many aspects to look at you cant make that broad statement.

But with that, what am I pushing for. Analog duplex, conventional, with Emergency Status, PTT ID and local recording or repeated back recording.

If given the funding, yes we would love to delve deeper into testing whats the safest form for Public Safety. But we were tasked with straight analog vs digital. We have solved that, now lets move to the other variables.



ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

ads47 wrote:But with the data we cant say that across the board as a broad statement because so many people will misread it.
So... don't make a broad statement. Try this:
"DANGER!
Radios using Digital Voice Technology will not be able to effectively communicate under certain circumstances!
These circumstances include talking with activated PASS alarms in the background and talking through an SCBA mask using digital voice technology, regardless of system coverage."

Get the message out loud and clear!

(glad I don't use P25 at this point... sheesh)

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
User avatar
MTS2000des
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:59 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS2500, XTS5000, and MTS2000

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by MTS2000des »

it's too bad that this unproven technology was not fully tested before being placed into service, and as usual, tombstone technology takes over. All I have to say to those who were listening to the sales weasels is I TOLD YOU SO. Digital voice is not ready for prime time in public safety.
The views here are my own and do not represent those of anyone else or the company, the boss, his wife, his dog or distant relatives.
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

TPG,
We are getting the message out loud and clear. I haven't found anyone who still thinks digital is the answer after our report. Your statement would be great, and we would make it if it were true. Like I have said many times now, you can't make such broad statements. Statements have to be based in fact, not emotion.

Your statement would be wrong because you can't say ALL PASS and ALL SCBA's. We didn't test ALL of them. We only tested some of the popular models and only certain vintages of those. Even within the same model different vintages will test differently due to small manufacturing changes. On SCBA mask there are some new mask that under informal testing actually perform phenomenally well compared to whats out there today. Our testing covered the largest portion of the market for whats being used in the field today by firefighters.

The IAFC statement that is due out soon, and the NTIA report statements were made as broad as could be backed up by fact. If after the IAFC Member Alert, Best Practices Report, NTIA study, and pending IAFC Summary someone doesn't get it, a stronger statement isn't going to help them.

ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

Oye....

Round 2

"DANGER!
Radios using Digital Voice Technology will not be able to effectively communicate under certain circumstances!
These circumstances include talking with certain activated PASS alarms in the background and talking through certain SCBA masks using digital voice technology, regardless of system coverage." Here is a list of confirmed PASS alarms and SCBA Masks that we have tested....

Then list the specific stuff you HAVE tested.

Oh, and I'm not making these statements based on emotion, I'm making them based on the test results.

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

Ok, now remember this was a test done by the Federal Government. They are not in the business to test equipment for companies. They were task with a problem and to come up with an answer. Not to test all variables. I don't recall the reason, but there was a legal reason given by the Feds, as to why we couldn't say exact make and model of every device (we tried!). We only gave credit to those companies that participated in the process with equipment and staff.


ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

This is growing very old, FAST....

NIST tested what you gave them, and then gave you results showing failures. I don't see anything to correct it by them.

There is a lot ducking here.
IE: Say that Digital won't work with certain PASS alarms and certain SCBA Masks = we can't
IE: Say what you tested in the test = We can't
IE: analog for fireground ops is better than digital = You have to look at the system

What's the point of all the testing if you can't speak the answers truthfully without distorting it?

Typical politics. At the end of this, the results will be "Digital outperforms Analog"

And you wonder why we always say, "200 years of tradition, unimpeded by progress."

what a waste

tpg
DONE
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

Glad you finally agree.

ads
User avatar
The Pager Geek
Posts: 1250
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:31 pm
What radios do you own?: Disney FRS

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by The Pager Geek »

ads47 wrote:Glad you finally agree.

ads
HAHAHAHA

def politics

tpg
Experienced Provider of Useless Information
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by escomm »

There's too much money on the table. APCO, DVSI and /\/\ (among others) have deep donation pocketbooks.

I'm still waiting for a good justification on why P25 equipment tends to cost 200-500% more than conventional.
Grog
On Moderation
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by Grog »

escomm wrote: I'm still waiting for a good justification on why P25 equipment tends to cost 200-500% more than conventional.
You already said it 8)

escomm wrote:There's too much money on the table
In this instance, the money is going to the manufacturers who KNOW they can get what they are asking for P25 equipment.
RADIOMAN2002
Posts: 1102
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: More than I can count

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by RADIOMAN2002 »

I didn't have the time to re-read all the nonsense about analog vs digital, and I might just be repeating myself and others but,it has pretty much been shown, by analitical testing and from field testing that digital will NOT work in any noisy enviroment. The human brain is the biggest filter of noisy enviroments, that why analog works. Even prior to 911 in NYC, FDNY had all kinds of problems using digital, fortunatly someone in the radio shop said enogh and reprogrammed all the radios to analog. For myself give me an analog, simplex radio, with or without a mic in the facemask, and it will most always work. Thats from years of experience. The manufacturers are just trying to save face for not doing the testing they should have done before releasing the digital equipment for public safety use, specifically the fire service, and/or having the FCC mandate radio transmissions convert to digital.
jbella
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2002 5:21 am

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by jbella »

ai4ui wrote:What I love is the fast, annoyed eye blinking from the chief as i described the problem to him.

Go figure...

RG

THAT is at the core of the problem.

I'm attempting to work up a very basic training class on radio basics. Even though I've been working on a couple projects (some on my own time---shame on me), I'm still just a "stupid FF" because I have no rank. Instead of the blinking, I just get the glazed look, even when I prove I'm right on something.

A lot of Chiefs, not to mentioning purchasing agents and others were either hoodwinked or intentionally bought radio systems that were 10 times the system a community needed. Radio system/technology envy at Chiefs' meetings did as much for /\/\'s profits as 9-11.
ads47
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:40 pm

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by ads47 »

The IAFC report has been posted.

http://iafc.org/displayindustryarticle. ... enbr=36853

ads
User avatar
kb9suy
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2001 4:00 pm
What radios do you own?: too many!!

Re: For those with digital radios in the fire service

Post by kb9suy »

Pager Geek I agree with you 100% But just like most politicians they sit on the fence and don't pick a side and switch back and forth between both sides to keep everyone happy. Basically you have to read through political cookie coating and say digital is not for fire ground. I want the audio recordings released for everyone to be able to make their own decision. For Analog simplex fire ground operations yes theirs a training issue. Doesn't matter what scba you use its comes down to mic placement and the user staying calm and not screaming while on the radio. It would be nice if the iafc stoodup and said no digital for fire ground and be done with it. This about protecting us and only us. If that means stepping on manufactures and politicians shoes who cares if it saves firefighters lives. Sadly polictical correctness in this country is getting people killed to worried about pleasing everyone instead of pointing the problem and taking care of it. That applies to just about everything going on in this country but im not going to go off topic. I have been listening to our starcom p25 system that our state police use here in illinois and theirs times they can't even make the system or audio is so unintelligable I fear for those guys lives.
Post Reply

Return to “General Motorola Solutions & Legacy Radio Discussion”