Re: Metronet radios

["Glen O'Riley" <glen.orileyDES@PAMlinx.iwarp.com>]

Generally a radio network is only as good as it is planned and implemented
(which is why the NSW GRN system was not even worth implementing, the
government as per usual never planned it properly), however, I have NEVER
had good experiences with Motorola equipment of any kind, be it pagers,
modems, phones or radios although their ICs seem to still work. As for the
PRM series radios from Philips (now Simoco Pacific), I wouldn't suggest them
either, they may be alright as a UHF CB, I don't like them that much, the
only decent radio Philips made was the old FM900 series which some coppers
still use and refuse to let go, fair enough. There are some good brands out
now, Kenwood has some rather good equipment out that is capable of as much
as Motorola's equipment. Even Ericson's systems may be another possibility
but I have heard worse things about Ericson than Motorola. America has some
bloody major probs with their police networks all run by......, this is just
my 2.2 cents worth after using Motorola Syntrx and XTS3000 radios in
emergency services, and the stupid GP300s at work which have never worked as
well as the Kenwoods. Tait is also a good brand which just come to mind as
well.


"BEE EFF" <mcreely@pnc.com.au> wrote in message
3A9458B9.556B93B5@pnc.com.au">news:3A9458B9.556B93B5@pnc.com.au...
> Glen,
>
> Better to have Motorola than that Philips/Simoco rubbish. Seimens would
> probably be OK(have had no experience with them).
>
> Motorola radios have been used all over the world for train ops with great
> success. Philips/Simoco have been used for State Rails' "CountryNet" and
NRC's
> "Aware" radio systems and have had no end of trouble.
>
> Vic Rail have used Motorola for the Metrol/Centrol System with great
> success(and it is years ahead of where State Rail and NRC are now).
>
> Just my personal thoughts, from personal experience
>
> Regards BEE EFF
>
> Glen O'Riley wrote:
>
> > Which radios are they using? The usual Motorola shit?
> >
> > "Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> > 3a924f2e$0$25505$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:3a924f2e$0$25505$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> > >
> > > "Glen O'Riley" <glen.orileyDES@PAMlinx.iwarp.com> wrote in message
> > > 3a9235e4$0$25489$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:3a9235e4$0$25489$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> > > | They may have an open channel where all trains within a certain
boundary
> > > are
> > > | on the same channel and can talk just like a normal CB until they
hit
> > the
> > > | next boundary which switches channels and then continues to be open.
> > >
> > > Not with the current radio.
> > >
> > > |
> > > |
> > > | "Jack" <dave60@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> > > | 3a9203b2.24534884@news.dingoblue.net.au">news:3a9203b2.24534884@news.dingoblue.net.au...
> > > | > As a direct result of the Glenbrook Inquiry, Metronet radios are
to be
> > > | > fitted to the Countrylink fleet. XPTs and Explorers.. There was a
> > > | > trial late last year of hand portable metronet radios but they
have
> > > | > proven to be dangerous in the extreme and wont be used by
Countrylink.
> > > | > The plan is to fit what is currently in Suburbans and interurbans,
> > > | > with the possibility that the radios will be  GPS dependant. The
> > > | > choice of these radios is strange because one of the recs from
> > > | > Glenbrook was train to train coms. This system in normal working
doest
> > > | > provide that unless you happen to know the run number of the train
you
> > > | > wish to speak to. But that is the system they are going to
implement
> > > | > on Countrylink services..
> > > | >
> > > | > Cheers
> > > | > Jack
> > > |
> > > |
> > >
> > >
>