Future Paging Solutions

[HarrisonRHW]

...Does Motorola have any?

I know that is a broad question but here is why I bring it up:

The big push now is to go to trunked systems. It isn't required, but with the fact that when an agency receives federal grant money, the system has to be Project 25 compliant, I am beginning to wonder about the vollys out there and how digital voice effects them.

What have people been using for paging systems? I am surprised Motorola doesn't have a version of the Minitor that supports trunking, digital voice, and is set off by something like ASTRO data or some other packet format.

I know you can't do QCII over a digital modulation since audio is not properly transmitted, so does anyone know of what solutions are in use out there?

Thanks

[ai4ui]

But of course Motorola has a solution...

The MOSCAD based FSA4000 that is about $100,000 per copy depending on options and has no provisions for portable paging.

It does have a great deal of redundency, to a point. I'm sure your local vendor would love to talk to you about it.

Robert

[HarrisonRHW]

I am talking about over the air options, not via IP. There would have to be wireless coverage since most stations in the area are unmanned.

I am sort of just trying to figure out exactly how some of these counties with one dispatch center for 20 or so departments plans to handle upgrading. I know of one specific example where they want to move onto a multi-site trunking system, but I have no idea how that would impact paging.

I know you could simulcast the tones on existing conventional channels, but what were to happen if as department did not want to simulcast voice paging?

[ai4ui]

We are on a 800 trunk system but still page on VHF. It is very cost effective and is the only feasible solution for us. Our sister agency has gone to the aforementioned FSA4000 system and wanted us to buy into it so we could pay for a redundent switch. We balked because of several reasons. First of all, cost. It would have been over a million dollars to switch to this system up front, and then monthly recurring costs of TRS subscription fees for the two 800 radios it uses per station. We still would have to maintain our VHF platform because as it would have been designed VHF is another redundent path. So there would be IP, 800 TRS, and VHF. The second problem is there was no provision to page ambulance crews that were out of their vehicle. Thirdly we have five contract stations that are a mix of volunteer and career, and it has no provision to page people from their homes or where ever they might be. They did offer that the system can be configured to send text messages to cell phones or alpha pagers. This would have put us on the hook for x number of cell phone or pager monthly fees. All in all it's a very nice, reliable system that meets all the NFPA requirements for fire station alerting. We had to pass because it is no where near as cost effective as VHF tone & voice paging.

As far as paging on a trunked system, you can do individual and group call alerts on trunked portables. The problem with this is that your up front costs will be high because you will have to provide each individual you want to be able to page with a radio. If you are paying monthly subscription fees for TRS access, then you will have high recurring costs as well.

Then there is commercial paging or cellular texting services. Again, if you have to provide all your people with the equipment you have high up front and recurring costs.

I don't think you will be able to beat VHF tone & voice paging and it's going to be around for a while. It is the most cost effective alerting platform right now.

[Karl NVW]

There's still the original 'from day one' FCC prohibition against paging on all 800 MHz channels, which includes public safety. Plus most console manufacturers know you can't send paging tones across a P25 digital trunking channel because the IMBE vocoder can't handle them. But don't let the FCC rules or the hardware design get in your way...

[HarrisonRHW]

It stinks that it is the most cost effective solution. I am assuming that even though a system has to be APCO-25 compliant, there is nothing that says all channels have to be digital modulation. So theoretically since pages happen on their own channel, it could be Moto Type II (or could it be 9600baud trunking? I know on one freq trunking you have to use digital voice). I know there are systems out there that have 1 or 2 channels just for things like Knox boxes and even paging, but I still wonder about two things...

1. Why doesn't Motorola have a 800MHz compatible pager... I even know of systems that are still 800MHz conventional! I know it wouldn't really help, but judging by the size of the XTS4000, it wouldn't be hard to cram a Type II capable receiver into the size of the current Minitor pager so that you could follow 2 talkgroups (or more)
2. Why don't Minitors handle anything other than QCII? What about MDC-1200, Astro Packet (or whatever it is called FDNY uses), or the built in signaling (as mentioned) of trunking systems.

I feel like Moto is just sort of forcing people to use a simulcast/patch system for all this to work.

Of course I am not going to argue the VHF/UHF paging simulcast channel isn't a bad idea, it is just with the system being multiple site, it feels like you would be able to gain more range

Thanks for the help... just trying to flush out possible ideas for the big wigs since the radio dealers are useless... they would be more than happy to sell everyone an XTS5000R, but that is just not necessary.

Oh before anyone asks... this isn't for inside CT... assisting friends out in the midwest..

[ai4ui]

There's probably not much incentive (think $$) for Motorola to develop any paging equipment for 800 trunking. First of all, like Karl NVW pointed out, paging is against the rules. No point in developing something that you can't sell. Furthermore, the agencies who could afford this type of system probably have paid staff housed in stations and are already using a MOSCAD type solution. Agencies that are dispatching volunteers from their work & homes probably aren't well funded and cannot afford the capital outlay for a trunking based pager even if it were legal. I suppose it wouldn't be too technically challenging - something similar to a trunk tracking scanner that would be able to follow the system on a particular talkgroup and then alert when it receives the right packet. It would be kind of nice to have a pager that would let you know when it was unable to receive the control channel and would say out of range like a regular subscriber unit does. I just don't think that there would be very many agencies buying in so there wouldn't be any economy of scale with enough units sold to offset the costs of R & D. And of course if it were a P25 receiver then there is the licensing fees to DVSI...