On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:53:41 +0000, Brian wrote:

t's crap compared to the old wide area encrypted network I used. Everyone
could hear each other clearly and it didn't break up. It had the occasional
UHF fluttering effect if in a difficult area, but nothing mad. o2-AIRWAVE
was over budget and you should see the contract!
The data side of it doesn't work, so no sending in reports. The pictures do
not work, so no pictures of suspects, the fingerprint scanning doesn't work
and people are told not to use it to speak privately or for "phone" because
it slows the system down.

It was a great idea on paper, but put it in the hands of people with a
degree (worthless piece of paper) with NO practical experience or common
sense and it falls apart.

All o2-Airwave is good for is voice comms, but only in the areas contracted
and agreed will have coverage. In a way planning permission was obtained
almost by force to provide comms in some areas as the project was already
agreed to. So it was another way of getting unrelated base stations and
aerials onto the same sites.

In Merseyside and Cheshire the system is worse than normal radios.

Doesn't surprise me.

Though one error on your part. IME these systems are designed by
consultants, not technical people. Good technical people are well aware
that new tech. is , shall we say, unreliable. There is a phrase KISS, keep
it simple, stupid.

The latest one is these ID cards. Whatever the rights & wrongs, they are
making huge claims for the tech. which no-one I know of thinks will work !

Consultants and Bureaucrats like it because it's new snazzy and expensive,
and they can make flashy PR announcements.

As a cop equivalent ; one half expects our BiB to be given Palm Pilots or
something to write their notes up on, simply because it's a flashy gadget.
Simple things, like in this case a notebook, work.