Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

comms...........

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • comms...........

    So when i start my new company i probally will use handheld and in car radios on a repeater system so that there will be service in the city/county i will be operating in, my question is this, since more then likely be headed to MO, at the end of this year, and will be starting a company out there, where is a good place to get comms in missouri ?
    Its not how we die that counts.....
    Its not how we lived that counts....
    all that matters is how we saved that one life that one time by being in the right place at the right time....

  • #2
    Originally posted by UtahProtectionForce View Post
    So when i start my new company i probally will use handheld and in car radios on a repeater system so that there will be service in the city/county i will be operating in, my question is this, since more then likely be headed to MO, at the end of this year, and will be starting a company out there, where is a good place to get comms in missouri ?
    Portables and mobiles? That's going to be quite costly, and finding a repeater location is a PITA. I'm not sure if they have service in Missouri or not, but you might want to look into Champion Communications and Mobex. Basically, it's a digital trunked system on 400mhz. IMHO, these system are phenomenal, as the range is practically 50 miles. The subscription fee for Champion is $25 per unit, per month. Mobex is $35 per unit, per month. Mobex is a little better as it comes with 3 talk-groups (channels if you will). Champion only has 1 talk group, but they both have (talk-around). Champion can run off of Kenwood radios (which kick arse IMHO) as well as Motorola. Kenwood radios tend to be cheaper, but don't sleep on Kenwood. They make some very nice equipment. Sense you obviously don't have contracts as of yet, this type of system would work alot better if you have 1 contract in location X and another contract 15 miles in location Y.
    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Comment


    • #3
      yeah that why i am considering this type of system, although a little more costly i would rather send officers out with radios rather then cell phones
      as radios are easier to communicate with, rather then trying to flip open a phone and notify dispatch. which takes a bit longer to key up, also you can false key a radio (pretend to key up) which makes people your dealing with calm down as the think you called for back up, whereas on a phone it is hard to false key up..
      Its not how we die that counts.....
      Its not how we lived that counts....
      all that matters is how we saved that one life that one time by being in the right place at the right time....

      Comment


      • #4
        Motorola has a new iDEN like system that's basically everything good about Nextel while dropping the bad stuff. Its like MOTOGO or something liek that, I forget the exact name.

        Marketed specifically for construction, security, public safety, and engineering services.
        Some Kind of Commando Leader

        "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

        Comment


        • #5
          also you can false key a radio (pretend to key up) which makes people your dealing with calm down as the think you called for back up
          Must be nice, out here that doesn't work. They will normally get more rowdy, and tell you to bring it on.
          "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

          Comment


          • #6
            Personally, I would lean towards VHF as opposed to UHF. Out here most companies go with UHF radio (with repeaters) and for some reason I get better reception of VHF units as I do UHF.

            The radio techs try and tell me that UHF is better for distance and penetrating buildings, however my practical experience tells me differently. I know they are the pros and all, I just can't figure out why I can be standing next to a Deputy Sheriff in the middle of a building out in the boonies where we can hear his dispatch on VHF, who is back in town (I know repeater), BUT I cannot hear my other officer down the road on UHF and damn near within line of sight, operating on a mobile unit kicking out 45 watts of transmission power.

            UPF, I agree with your decision to lease/rent out the equipment. That'll help offset the costs, and COULD be a tax write off as well. Just be sure and get a very good Enrolled Agent. A EA is step or two above your general issue CPA, PLUS if there is a problem with your taxes this person can legally repreesent you in court, so there is no need to also have a tax atty on standby.
            ~Super Ninja Sniper~
            Corbier's Commandos

            Nemo me impune lacessit

            Grammical and Spelling errors may occur form time to time. Yoov bin worned

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ValleyOne View Post
              Personally, I would lean towards VHF as opposed to UHF. Out here most companies go with UHF radio (with repeaters) and for some reason I get better reception of VHF units as I do UHF.
              It's the nature of the transmission wave, lower frequency transmissions penetrate buildings & terrain better than UHF period! line-of-site is UHF's biggest weakness, for example in a mobile-to-mobile scenario 4 watts HF was readable where 5 watts UHF was not, this being from one side of town to the other (around 15~20Kms total) through buildings & undulating terrain

              Originally posted by Wikipedia
              "The point to point transmission of radio waves is affected by many variables. Atmospheric moisture, the stream of particles from the sun called solar wind, and time of day will all have an effect on the signal transmission. All radio waves are partially absorbed by atmospheric moisture. Atmospheric absorption reduces, or attenuates, the strength of radio signals over long distances. The effects of attenuation increases according to the frequency. UHF signals are generally more degraded by moisture than lower bands such as VHF. The layer of the Earth's atmosphere called the ionosphere is filled with charged particles that can reflect radio waves. The reflection of radio waves can be helpful in transmitting a radio signal over long distances as the wave repeatedly bounces from the sky to the ground. UHF benefits less from the effects of reflection than lower (VHF, etc.) frequencies. UHF transmissions may be enhanced by tropospheric ducting as the atmosphere warms and cools throughout the day.

              The main advantage of UHF transmission is the physically short wave that is produced by the high frequency. The size of transmission and reception equipment, (particularly antennas), is related to the size of the radio wave. Smaller and less conspicuous antennas can be used than with lower frequency bands.

              UHF is widely used in two-way radio systems and cordless telephones. UHF signals travel over line-of-sight distances. Transmissions generated by two-radios and cordless telephones do not travel far enough to interfere with local transmissions. A number of public safety and business communications are handled on UHF. Civilian applications such as GMRS, PMR446, UHF CB, and 802.11b ("WiFi") are popular uses of UHF frequencies. A repeater is used to propagate UHF signals when a distance that is greater than the line-of-sight is required..."
              Full article @ Wikipedia
              "We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give" - Winston Churchill

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ValleyOne View Post
                Personally, I would lean towards VHF as opposed to UHF. Out here most companies go with UHF radio (with repeaters) and for some reason I get better reception of VHF units as I do UHF.

                The radio techs try and tell me that UHF is better for distance and penetrating buildings, however my practical experience tells me differently. I know they are the pros and all, I just can't figure out why I can be standing next to a Deputy Sheriff in the middle of a building out in the boonies where we can hear his dispatch on VHF, who is back in town (I know repeater), BUT I cannot hear my other officer down the road on UHF and damn near within line of sight, operating on a mobile unit kicking out 45 watts of transmission power.

                UPF, I agree with your decision to lease/rent out the equipment. That'll help offset the costs, and COULD be a tax write off as well. Just be sure and get a very good Enrolled Agent. A EA is step or two above your general issue CPA, PLUS if there is a problem with your taxes this person can legally repreesent you in court, so there is no need to also have a tax atty on standby.
                UHF is better for penetrating buildings, VHF is better for distance. It used to be common to see UHF in use in busy metro area's and VHF in more rural and suburban area's. The spike in popularity of 800mhz trunked systems and P25 digital systems has changed this a bit in recent years.
                ATTN. SPECOPS AND GECKO45 my secret username is CIDDECEP and I am your S2. My authorization code is Six Wun Quebec Oscar Fife. Your presence here is tactically dangerous and compromises our overall mission parameter. Cease and desist all activity on this board. Our “enemies” are deft at computer hacking and may trace you back to our primary locale. You have forced me to compromise my situation to protect your vulnerable flank. This issue will be addressed later.

                Comment

                Leaderboard

                Collapse
                Working...
                X