Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Paul Robson" wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 02:43:47 -0700, Concerned Officer wrote: Let me be quite clear about a few things first of all. It is the government's fault that police forces have had to switch to Airwave. snip Be fair ! Why should it be different from any other government project. You didn't really think it would work did you ??? What like the Armys new BOWMAN system? Acronym for (Better Off With a Nokia And a Map) ;-) Steve Terry |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Concerned Officer" wrote in message
oups.com... Paul Robson wrote: On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 02:43:47 -0700, Concerned Officer wrote: Let me be quite clear about a few things first of all. It is the government's fault that police forces have had to switch to Airwave. snip You didn't really think it would work did you ??? Considering they spent £2.3bn (and counting!) on the system, I would have hoped it to work slightly better than the quality I can get out of two tin cans and a piece of string. Sad, really. Cheers, PC A.N. Other. and all because the Gov didn't want to share a network. For at least the last 5 years, Scandinavian countries use GSM Pro, which has secure Push To Talk closed network groups on the existing 900MHz GSM phone networks, using cheap rugged GSM Pro PTT phones like the Ericsson R250, which now sell for under 100 quid. Used with Sims that have high network priority allocated to them, so if a cell is full, it kicks off lower priority users to force a connection. and as we all know UK 900MHz GSM coverage is extensive and reliable. The cost of the whole upgrade to GSM Pro instead of Tetra airwave could have been measured in thousands rather than billions of pounds. So of course the Blairites had to reinvent the wheel and make it of gold, why not, they aren't paying for it Steve Terry |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Paul Robson" wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 05:08:30 -0700, Concerned Officer wrote: snip Considering they spent £2.3bn (and counting!) on the system, I would have hoped it to work slightly better than the quality I can get out of two tin cans and a piece of string. Sad, really. Well, why *doesn't* it work ? Why can't the police hang on to the mobile networks ? I don't know, no-one does. It was a political decision after Tony was deeply embarrassed by his police security talking about their location when he was out with Dubbya, completely compromising Dubbyas accompanying security. (the US secret service have used encoded radios since the 1960s) When Tony found out all and sundry were listening in to his security, he ordered a new secure system be implemented ASAP, cost no object. O2 rubbed their hands with glee, and muttered the infamous word "Tetra" Steve Terry |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Steve Terry
writes "Paul Robson" wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 05:08:30 -0700, Concerned Officer wrote: snip Considering they spent £2.3bn (and counting!) on the system, I would have hoped it to work slightly better than the quality I can get out of two tin cans and a piece of string. Sad, really. Well, why *doesn't* it work ? Why can't the police hang on to the mobile networks ? I don't know, no-one does. It was a political decision after Tony was deeply embarrassed by his police security talking about their location when he was out with Dubbya, completely compromising Dubbyas accompanying security. (the US secret service have used encoded radios since the 1960s) When Tony found out all and sundry were listening in to his security, he ordered a new secure system be implemented ASAP, cost no object. O2 rubbed their hands with glee, and muttered the infamous word "Tetra" Steve Terry Where an analogue trunked system would do about all thats needed and is proven and costs less, but hey!, its got to be digital like that pox known as DAB which sounds worse than FM;((.... -- Tony Sayer |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tony sayer wrote:
proven and costs less, but hey!, its got to be digital like that pox known as DAB which sounds worse than FM;((.... Then you or the broadcaster does something wrong - DAB ist just great here in germany. regards - Ralph -- Want to get in touch? http://www.radio-link.net/whereisralph.txt |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Whenever I have been in town and an officer has been using an airwave radio
he/she always appears to be struggling to hear what is being said. With the old analogue motorolas they always were belting out the audio so everyone could hear. Is this another fault of airwave? BTW Sepura radios are what they are using round here. Melv "Concerned Officer" wrote in message oups.com... chas wrote: As another police airwave user I have to say it is an utterly ****e system. Officer safety IS being compromised. Airwave drops out completely on a regular basis in the control rooms, the 'hang time' to transmit is as long as EIGHT seconds sometimes - utterly useless during a pursuit or something. The BUSY message is almost permantently on and it is just NOT designed for busy areas on a Fri/Sat night with lots of officers using it. Chas thanks for bringing that up, I knew I had forgotten something. The hang time for us can, as you say, creep up towards the 10 second area on busy nights. This is not simply waiting for someone else to get off the air, but purely the time it takes for the system to stop faffing around and give you permission to speak. Of course, whilst waiting for this 'hang' to clear, if comms speak you start the whole damn process all over again. I have actually given up trying to pass a relatively urgent update before now and typed it out on the MDT instead. Do they expect us to f**ing run down the street texting on the damn thing to get updates? I can't get my head around the texting process sitting down let alone running after someone and trying to do it! The process is just too complicated... and I'm no luddite.. I easily get through 300 text messages a month on my private mobile. The sooner the Federation and Unison or whoever the lazy arse reps are, get together and thrash it out with the Chief Constables - the sooner officers can start seeing improvements and have confidence in the system. Call me a cynic but I cannot see the Federation or Unison or whoever actually making any difference. Forces have committed so much time and money on the project that it will be an admission that they cocked up to back down now. It's a similar story with SAP.. if your force uses that poor excuse for a system for time management then you know what I mean... Adam. |
#37
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ralph A. Schmid, DK5RAS" wrote in message ... tony sayer wrote: proven and costs less, but hey!, its got to be digital like that pox known as DAB which sounds worse than FM;((.... Then you or the broadcaster does something wrong - DAB ist just great here in germany. regards - Ralph -- Want to get in touch? http://www.radio-link.net/whereisralph.txt There is a simple reason for it. I believe in Germany the data rate used is 256Kb/s? In the UK the regulatory body, Ofcom (or it may have been its predecessor the Radiocommunications Agency) issued an advice to broadcasters that the lowest acceptable data rate should be 128Kb/s, so what happened? Correct, they all moved to 128Kb/s (or less in mono.) Before this many were at 160Kb and several were at 192Kb. Now there is only one, BBC R3 (the classical station) that transmits at 192Kb (or 160Kb during busy periods) and Classic FM (the commercial classical station) that uses 160Kb at all times. There are rumours around that Ofcom are to change their guidance to 'not lower than 112Kb/s' sometime soon. Heaven helps us if they do! In the UK it's all about quantity - quality doesn't even get a look in. -- Woody harrogate2 at ntlworld dot com |
#38
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"harrogate2" wrote:
There is a simple reason for it. I believe in Germany the data rate used is 256Kb/s? In the UK the regulatory body, Ofcom (or it may have been its predecessor the Radiocommunications Agency) issued an advice to broadcasters that the lowest acceptable data rate should be 128Kb/s, so what happened? Correct, they all moved to 128Kb/s (or less We have here 160 or more, just the traffic announcement program uses 64 kbit/sec, sounding like AM. There are rumours around that Ofcom are to change their guidance to 'not lower than 112Kb/s' sometime soon. Heaven helps us if they do! In the UK it's all about quantity - quality doesn't even get a look in. This is bad, really bad ![]() regards - Ralph -- Want to get in touch? http://www.radio-link.net/whereisralph.txt |
#39
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Ralph A.
Schmid, DK5RAS writes "harrogate2" wrote: There is a simple reason for it. I believe in Germany the data rate used is 256Kb/s? In the UK the regulatory body, Ofcom (or it may have been its predecessor the Radiocommunications Agency) issued an advice to broadcasters that the lowest acceptable data rate should be 128Kb/s, so what happened? Correct, they all moved to 128Kb/s (or less We have here 160 or more, just the traffic announcement program uses 64 kbit/sec, sounding like AM. There are rumours around that Ofcom are to change their guidance to 'not lower than 112Kb/s' sometime soon. Heaven helps us if they do! In the UK it's all about quantity - quality doesn't even get a look in. This is bad, really bad ![]() It'll happen over there. Just give it time:!. Plus the joys of tandem coding etc.. BTW is Bayern Klassik 4 still transmitting at 256 K on DAB it sounds super on satellite ![]() -- Tony Sayer |
#40
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Melv wrote: Whenever I have been in town and an officer has been using an airwave radio he/she always appears to be struggling to hear what is being said. With the old analogue motorolas they always were belting out the audio so everyone could hear. I have no experience with the Sepura you mention, but certainly the Nokia's are awful when it comes to clarity. That's clarity from the radio itself, rather than blaming poor signal/too much contention on the talkgroup/aerial site. The Nokia's have volume which goes from 0 (speakers off) to 10 (blown speaker). However the trouble is if the volume is set to 4, you can't hear it with even minor background noise, and if set to 5 or above which is ideally where it needs to be, then it is so distorted you can't make out what is being said anyway. The speaker size when compared to the old Motorola bricks (and no doubt the quality thereof), is **** poor. Nokia make good mobiles. That is what they should stick to; Their radios are crap. Headsets have been distributed to us, but they are *worse* than the ones you get free with your average Nokia cellphone. One knock and the microphone becomes disloged inside the casing and the end result when transmitting is it sounds like you have your head up your arse. A far better device would be an attachable parrot just like in the old days! Better quality speaker, better quality microphone, nice big PTT button and still the option of an in-ear piece. A. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
I'm Cutting Back (OT) | Shortwave | |||
not cutting excess wire beyond antenna | Antenna | |||
Cutting your own | General | |||
Cutting your own | General |