First, interoperability can take many forms.  But, in this discussion, let’s simply assume that this means that one person can speak directly to another person, with each person using a portable or mobile 2-way radio.

Before we look at MOTOTRBO, let’s look at other types of radio communications systems, with regards to interoperability.

First of all, no matter what type of system is involved, if two radios are on different frequency bands, then they can’t communicate with each other.  For example, a VHF radio can’t communicate directly with a UHF radio.  There is no direct interoperability between two such radios.

Second, while P25 is touted as an ‘interoperable digital mode’, the fact is a P25 conventional radio can’t communicate directly with a P25 trunked repeater system.

So, interoperability issues exist even within analog FM systems, and even within so-called “interoperable” P25 systems.

So how is interoperability attained in analog FM systems, where different frequency bands are used?  ‘Bridges’, available from numerous manufacturers, are often used to connect between base stations or repeaters that are operating on different frequency bands.  This is often an effective way of providing interoperability between radios on different frequency bands.

What about interoperability between conventional P25 and trunked P25 systems?  Again, bridges are used to connect between conventional base stations or repeaters and the P25 trunked systems, to allow the subscriber units (mobiles and portables) on each system, to communicate with each other.  P25 mobiles and portables can also operate in the analog FM mode, and P25 trunked mobiles and portables can also operate in the P25 conventional mode.  So, on a channel by channel basis, users can ‘fall back’ to this ‘common’ operating mode (either analog FM or P25 conventional), in some cases, to allow direct communications between users (assuming that all users are on the same frequency band).

So, now let’s consider MOTOTRBO.  How does it compare to these other types of systems?

All MOTOTRBO radios (mobiles and portables) can be programmed on a channel by channel basis, for either digital mode or analog FM mode.  So, just as is the case with P25 systems, MOTOTRBO users can switch to analog FM channels, to maintain interoperability with other analog FM users, in some cases (assuming that all users are on the same frequency band).

Also, just as must be done to provide interoperability between P25 conventional systems and P25 trunked repeater systems, a ‘bridging system’ can be used to connect between MOTOTRBO systems, operating in the digital mode, and other non-MOTOTRBO systems (including analog FM, P25, and even AM systems).  An example of one such bridging system is the “c-Bridge”, available from Rayfield Communications (www.rayfield.net/c-bridge).  This bridging system uses the latest hardware and software technology, to provide MOTOTRBO interoperability solutions second-to-none.

So, in summary, it’s very clear that the claim that MOTOTRBO does away with interoperability, is not true.  Interoperability with MOTOTRBO is just as easy (and much less costly) as compared to interoperability within P25 systems.  As with any communications system, the key to proper interoperability is planning and proper system design.

Let’s first look at what would classify a radio as ‘public safety grade’.

First of all, Motorola offers no such thing as a “certification for public safety use”.  This is a term that has been ‘concocted’ by those who are not at all familiar with how radio equipment is tested to meet various ‘guidelines’ or ‘specifications’.  So, we can throw this phrase/term out right at the beginning.

With the above said, there are technical ‘standards’ that are used by manufacturers to ‘rate’ electronic equipment.  Typically, most manufacturers, including Motorola, use the MIL-STD standards, developed by the U.S. Military, as well as the IP-rating standards developed by the International Electrotechnical Commission.

Simply put, according to Motorola, a two-way radio that meets the MIL-STD’s 810c, d, e, and f, is considered to be a ‘public safety grade’ radio.

This means that we can determine if a radio is ‘public safety grade’ by looking at it’s MIL-STD ratings and IP-ratings, to see how it compares to radios that are definitely considered to be ‘public safety grade’.

For example, let’s compare the high-end XTS-series of portable ‘public safety grade’ radios with the MOTOTRBO XPR-series of portable radios.  How do they compare with reference to the MIL-STD’s and IP-rating standards?

Interestingly, when we compare the XTS-series radios to the XPR-series radios, we find that both series of portable radios meet the same MIL-STD’s.  That alone means that, according to Motorola, the XPR-series of portable radios is considered to be of ‘public safety grade’ or ‘public safety quality’.

But, now let’s look at the IP-rating standards of both radios.  We find that the IP-rating of the ‘standard’ XPR-series portables EXCEEDS the IP-rating of the XTS-series portables, unless the more-costly waterproof option is used with the XTS-series radios.  The XPR-series portable is rated IP57, while the XTS-series is only rated IP54, without the waterproof option.  With the waterproof option, this raises the XTS-series radio’s rating to IP67, which then exceeds the ‘standard’ XPR-series portable’s rating.  However, a special CSA-approved model of the XPR-series portable is available, which also has an IP67 rating.  So, in this case, the XPR-series portable radios are comparable in all standards ratings to the XTS-series of portable radios.  It should be noted that the non-waterproof XTS-series portable radio is considered to be a ‘public safety grade’ radio.  In other words, the extra IP67 rating is not needed to meet the criteria of a ‘public safety grade radio.

So, in conclusion, the facts prove that the XPR-series of radios are ‘public safety grade’ or ‘public safety quality’, based on testing that has been done on both product-series models.

The system will consist of 450 Digital Mobile Radio (DMR) simulcast VHF and UHF repeaters and 22 TETRA sites and will support thousands of mobile, portable, and fixed subscriber units.

First of all, this Federal Mandate applies to any radio system that is licensed by the FCC, that operates on frequencies between 150 – 174 mhz or 450 – 470 mhz, and that is licensed for business/industrial use or public safety use.  Marine radio systems, amateur radio systems, and certain paging-only systems are exempt.  All other FCC-licensed radio users must comply (such as businesses, churches, organizations and associations (profit or non-profit), schools, etc. as well as local, county, and state law enforcement agencies, fire departments, and any other non-Federal government agencies).

Here are the important dates that you’ll want to be aware of, if this Federal Mandate applies to you, as outlined above.

Jan 1, 2011

The FCC will no longer license new systems that operate in the wideband mode, after this date.  Also, the FCC will not allow any modifications to existing wideband mode systems, if those changes result in changing the ‘coverage area’ of the existing system.

For example, increasing the height of the antenna on a repeater or base station, or increasing the transmitter power output would all result in a change in the ‘coverage area’ of a system.  These modifications can no longer be done on a system that is operating in the wideband mode, unless that system is immediately converted to narrowband mode.  Also, changing the physical location of a repeater or base station may result in a change in the ‘coverage area’ of a system, and if that is the case, then this can no longer be done on a wideband mode system, either.

Jan. 1, 2013

All two-way radio systems must be operating in the narrowband mode by this date.  There will be no exceptions or ‘extensions’ of this deadline.  Those who have not converted to narrowband mode may be open to enforcement action by the FCC, which could include warnings, fines, or even loss of licenses.  The FCC has made it very clear that there will be no exceptions made for anyone, for any reasons.

Now, as to wrong information that has been spread around the country, regarding the FCC Narrowband Mandate, the following should clear up the two most common ones.

1.  Narrowbanding means that you’ll have to switch to digital.

Not true.  At this point, the FCC is only requiring that radios use a narrower ‘bandwidth’.  This can be accomplished using narrowband analog FM.  Digital is NOT required.  However, switching to narrowband mode may result in a decrease in the coverage area of your existing radio system.  Some digital modes of operation will overcome this reduction in range when changing from wideband mode to narrowband mode.  If this is of concern (a loss of range on your radio system), then please let us know and we’ll discuss this issue further.

2.  Narrowbanding means that you’ll have to change frequencies.

Not true.  The frequencies on which you currently operate will not change.  Only the ‘bandwidth’ of your radios must change.  For radios that can operate in a narrowband ‘mode’, this only requires that the radio be reprogrammed for ‘narrowband operation’.

3.  I can have my old wideband radios ‘modified’ by a radio shop to operate on narrowband.

Not true.  Actually, this should be answered as “Not True, in most cases”.  The FCC has made it very clear that a radio that has been modified ‘in the field’ (such as by a local radio shop) to ‘convert’ it to narrowband mode, can’t legally be used unless it receives a new Type Certification from the FCC.  This involves having the radio tested by an approved engineering laboratory, to make sure that it complies with current FCC rules, and then the FCC will issue a new Type Cerfication number that must be attached (on a label) to the radio.  This entire procedure can be very expensive (on the order of thousands of dollars), so it’s much more cost-effective to replace old wideband-only radios.

What Needs to Be Done

In order to comply with the new FCC rules, your radios will either have to be reprogrammed for narrowband mode (if that is possible), or replaced with radios that can operate in the narrowband mode.  Your FCC license will also need to be changed, to include the narrowband mode of operation.  This can easily be added.  (It should be added to the license, leaving the existing wideband mode information also on the license.  The wideband information will be removed sometime after Jan. 1, 2013).  There will be a cost for modifying the license to add the narrowband mode information.  The FCC charges a filing fee of $60.00.  While the modification can be done online at no additional cost, beyond the filing fee, it’s much better to have a frequency coordinator do this for you.  (There have been cases where licenses were inadvertently cancelled, when someone made a mistake in trying to add the narrowband mode to a license.  This can be a very costly mistake to correct (hundreds to thousands of dollars)).  Most coordinators are charging around $25.00 per license (not per frequency) to add narrowband mode to a license.  Thus, the total cost should be in the range of $85.00 to $100.00 per license.

If you have any questions about this FCC mandate, please don’t hesitate to call us.  We’ll be happy to help.

Also, if your agency needs to replace any older radio equipment that can not be programmed to operate in the narrowband mode, we would appreciate the opportunity to provide a quote for new equipment.

More Information on the FCC Narrowbanding Mandate:

We would like to ‘set the record straight’ on this subject.

First, let’s consider the idea that Motorola does not ‘endorse’ MOTOTRBO for use in mission critical applications.  Is this true?  Let’s let Motorola’s own marketing materials for MOTOTRBO, answer that question….

References to “public safety” are made in the marketing brochure “MOTOTRBO Accessories for Professional Digital Two-Way Radio Systems”.

On page 4 of this brochure, it states:  “Built-in Accessory Antenna Port—The portable connector design incorporates the antenna signal pass-through within the audio connector, eliminating the need for an external radio frequency (RF) adapter for public safety microphones.”

On page 5, it further states:  “These remote speaker microphones boast a revolutionary windporting feature that helps lessen background noise from high winds and other severe weather conditions. Audio can pass through the speaker grill even when the microphone port is blocked by water. Now public safety professionals can be more confi dent than ever of clear, understandable communication when Mother Nature is uncooperative.” 

On page 5, a list 6 different models of “Public Safety Microphones” is shown, along with a list of 4 different accessories for the public safety microphones.

And on page 10, this brochure lists 4 different “Public Safety Microphone Antennas”.

On the front cover of the Remote Mount Control Head Installation Guide (for the remote mount control head for the MOTOTRBO XPR-series mobiles), a photograph is used, showing a firefighter talking on a radio, while standing in front of a house on fire.  Obviously, if Motorola was not ‘endorsing’ the use of MOTOTRBO for public safety mission critical use, then they would have used a different photograph for the front cover of this document.

Motorola publishes a number of Use Case Studies, describing how MOTOTRBO has been used in different applications.  For example, they have Use Case Studies on the use of MOTOTRBO for schools, electric utilities, resorts, and hospitals, just to name a few.  Of great significance, Motorola just recently published a Use Case Study about a MOTOTRBO system in the state of Georgia, used by public safety agencies (law enforcement, fire, and EMS) for county-wide coverage.

Click Here to download a copy of this Public Safety Use Case Study.

It’s obvious that Motorola is, in fact, ‘endorsing’ the use of MOTOTRBO for mission critical applications (public safety) or they would not be publishing marketing materials that ‘target’ the public safety community.

Now let’s consider the functionality of MOTOTRBO.  Some claim that MOTOTRBO lacks the functionality and features that are needed for it to be considered as a public safety radio product or system.  So, first, let’s look at what MOTOTRBO offers.

MOTOTRBO offers the following features/functions:

• Provides 2 ‘virtual channels’ on every repeater, reducing cost of infrastructure while giving more capacity as compared to analog or P25 Phase 1
• Background Audio Noise Suppression – reduces or eliminates background noise such as produced by large trucks, lawn mower engines, chain saw engines, sirens, air horns, etc.
• Up to 40% improvement in “Talk-Time” with portables as compared to analog radios
• Auto-Roaming Between Multiple Repeater Sites
• More usable range than analog, using the same transmitter power levels

• Unique ID for every radio
• Emergency Signaling
• Emergency Transmission with Unique ID Display
• “Lone Worker” (Man-Down)
• Call Alert
• Radio Query
• GPS Built-In
• Text Messaging Built-In
• Telemetry Built-In
• Same or less cost than analog equipment

Clearly, MOTOTRBO offers much more functionality than any analog radio system.  Even analog systems that incorporate MDC1200 or similar signaling, still do not have the functionality that MOTOTRBO includes.  Yet no one will argue that all of the existing analog radio systems in use by many thousands of public safety personnel, were not designed for public safety use and should not be used for mission critical applications.  The truth is, MOTOTRBO is a major step ‘up’ from analog public safety systems.

Along these lines, some will claim that MOTOTRBO shouldn’t be used for public safety communications because it doesn’t meet the P25 standard.  While it’s true that MOTOTRBO is not compatible with P25 systems, the fact is MOTOTRBO includes most, if not all, of the functions that are listed as ‘mandated’ or ‘service options’ for P25 equipment and systems. 

Here’s a list, comparing these functions, between MOTOTRBO and P25:

Another claim that is often made about MOTOTRBO is that it’s ‘proprietary’.  The truth is, it’s no more proprietary than Motorola’s Astro 25 (their version of P25).

MOTOTRBO is based on an open standard called Digital Mobile Radio (DMR).  This standard is ‘governed’ by ETSI.  Motorola owns certain intellectual property rights for some of the DMR technology, and as part of their agreement with ETSI, Motorola will license this technology to anyone who asks for it, on fair and reasonable terms.  The exact same situation exists with P25.  Motorola owns certain intellectual property rights to some of the P25 technology, and any manufacturer that wants to produce a P25-compatible product, must license this technology from Motorola.

It’s true that MOTOTRBO does include some proprietary functionality, that is not part of the DMR standard.  The same holds true for Astro 25.  Motorola has included certain proprietary functions in Astro 25, that are not part of the P25 standard.  Yet, no one claims that Astro 25 is ‘proprietary’.  The same is true of MOTOTRBO – it is not proprietary.

Up until recently, Motorola was the only manufacturer who was producing and marketing DMR products in the United States.  This also has led to some claiming that MOTOTRBO is proprietary.  Of course, this again is not true, since MOTOTRBO is based on an open standard.  At one time, only one manufacturer produced and marketed P25 equipment in the United States.  Yet no one ever claimed that this equipment was proprietary, since they new that it was based on an open standard.  In fact, one other manufacturer has already released a MOTOTRBO-compatible product line into the United States marketplace, and at least two more manufacturers will be following later this year and next year.

Finally, are the MOTOTRBO radios themselves ‘public safety grade’ units?  They meet the same Mil-Spec standards that other Motorola radios meet that have been used for many years in mission critical applications.  In fact, the XPR-series portables are submersible to 1 meter for up to 30 minutes.  This exceeds the specs for an HT-1250 portable radio, yet the HT-1250 has been used extensively by law enforcement and fire service personnel with no question as to it being a ‘public safety grade radio’ or not.  So, the claim that the MOTOTRBO radios themselves are not ‘public safety grade’ radios, is absolutely not true.

We shouldn’t end this discussion without a few comments on interoperability.  The MOTOTRBO radios (mobiles and portables) can all operate in analog mode, on a per-channel basis.  So a MOTOTRBO radio can be programmed with both digital channels and analog channels.  In some configurations, the radios can scan between the digital and analog channels.  For further interoperability, there are many ways of ‘bridging’ between a MOTOTRBO system and an analog system or analog channels.  The latest technology to do this is from Rayfield Communications themselves – the c-Bridge System.  This technology connects to the MOTOTRBO system at the IP level.  This results in a very ‘clean’ installation with excellent audio quality.  Such bridging can be used to also connect a MOTOTRBO system into a P25 system, as well as analog base stations, analog conventional repeaters, LTR trunked systems, and even IDEN networks.  Interestingly, even P25 trunking systems must use some type of ‘bridging’ to connect into non-P25 systems, in many cases.

So, is MOTOTRBO good and usable for public safety?  Definitely.  Is MOTOTRBO the ‘right’ system for everyone in public safety?  Probably not.  It can not (at this time) provide extreme wide-area coverage (such as state-wide).  So other types of systems are better suited for those applications.  However, for many small city and rural public safety agencies, MOTOTRBO can be a perfect fit.