1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    52

    Default Pagers with AFG Grant???

    Does anybody know if it will be possible to get AFG grant money for pagers?

    I found the following:

    "In regard to communications, all digital equipment will be (a) P25 capable and/or (b) subject to compliance with SAFECOM standards. As a senior executive from a major manufacturer stated, there are some “cracks in the door” (i.e. the possibility of applying for equipment that can be upgraded to P25, or a plan to certify interoperability with the State Plan). In reality, it will cost you more to “upgrade” than it would to purchase approved P25 equipment. State DHS offices cannot draft policy and/or guidance for federally administered grant programs including the FEMA Assistance to Firefighters grant."

    I guess this only applies to digital equipment, right? So we should be fine applying for analog pagers especially with the narrowband switch in mind.

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,995

    Default

    Pagers are fine. This about digital is trying to stop the people who would buy non- P25 digital radios such as Trbo and IDAS cause of a slick salesmen who has no concerns about the safety of your firefighters.

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,089

    Default

    If you can't muster the troops, how can they fight the fire?DHS udnerstands that; pagers are in for AFG!
    Kurt Bradley
    Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
    " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Ok, got ya. This restriction only applies to radios. Thanks for your help guys.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koechler View Post
    Ok, got ya. This restriction only applies to radios. Thanks for your help guys.
    It only applies to DIGITAL radios. You can still buy analog radios too. They're just saying that if you are buying digital radios, you have to buy P25 compliant digital radios. And any radio purchase must fall in line with your state's communication plan.

    As has been said, pagers is non of the above and are ok.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    cubachief502's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cuba, Alabama
    Posts
    30

    Default

    So many are not buying the P25 equipment and are being led astray by the mother M sales team. I wonder what, if anything, will ever come of it.

    The sad thing is the fact that the departments trust the sales team and don't beleive they are doing anything wrong.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cubachief502 View Post
    So many are not buying the P25 equipment and are being led astray by the mother M sales team. I wonder what, if anything, will ever come of it.

    The sad thing is the fact that the departments trust the sales team and don't beleive they are doing anything wrong.
    Huh? You're saying people should be buying P25 equipment that they don't need?
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default The real reason for purchasing P25

    Although I don't normally participate in forum discussions, I felt that a little clarification might be in order for the real reason to purchase P25 equipment. It isn't about making you purchase equipment you don't need. DHS says you can buy anything you wish, but only under certain conditions if you want federal grant money.

    The reason for stipulating P25 is the need for INTEROPERABILITY! It isn't about individual opinions, departmental resources, or misrepresentation of facts by suppliers (whether purposeful or in error).

    You may want to check out http://falconinfo.blogspot.com/2010/...ing-wrong.html for additional information.

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,596

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    Although I don't normally participate in forum discussions, I felt that a little clarification might be in order for the real reason to purchase P25 equipment. It isn't about making you purchase equipment you don't need. DHS says you can buy anything you wish, but only under certain conditions if you want federal grant money.

    The reason for stipulating P25 is the need for INTEROPERABILITY! It isn't about individual opinions, departmental resources, or misrepresentation of facts by suppliers (whether purposeful or in error).

    You may want to check out http://falconinfo.blogspot.com/2010/...ing-wrong.html for additional information.
    The real reason for forcing people to buy into communications systems that we don't need is so that certain manufacturers can sell all new equipment to keep their chinese factories in production. That is not truly in the best interest of Firefighter safety. These digital systems are a technology that when it works well it's fine. Unfortunately most of the time they don't work well and cause more problems at triple the cost of an analog system.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default Reply to islandfire03

    Let me restate what I said earlier. The reason for P25 is INTEROPERABILITY. It is NOT about Chinese manufacturing, greedy corporations, or even firefighter safety. It is all about INTEROPERABILITY!

    As far as benefiting a particular manufacturer, which one exactly would that be? and do you have sales reports to validate your charge? Got to go now. I think I hear black helicopters overhead.....

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    Horsefeathers. You have no idea what you're talking about. Please stop confusing people who actually look at these threads for help.

    It has NOTHING to do with interoperability if nobody is using it. If nobody in your area uses it, you don't use it, your state's communication plan doesn't require it, and there is no added benefit, then there is no need to buy it. It is not a stipulation for federal grant money and never was (another lie started mostly by Motorola). Buying something labeled P25 ads nothing to interoperability if there is nobody to interoperate with. This comprises probably 90% of the country.

    For those who have an actual need to build out a digital trunking system, they're using P25 as the standard for consitency and interoperability between digital systems. If you and everyone else around you doesn't have a digital system, then it is irrelevent.

    You are doing exactly what the Motorola snake oil salesmen do. Tell people they need P25 equipment for interoperability that doesn't exist. Swindling hundreds of thousands of dollars out of municipalities that don't know any better at the cost of us taxpayers. There are enough of them running around already, we don't you on here telling people the same lies.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    cubachief502's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cuba, Alabama
    Posts
    30

    Default

    The problem here is the fact that the rules state that you must buy P25. I didn't need P25, but you better bet your bottom dollar that I purchased equipment that would function in digital and P25 mode. Sure... We still run analogue, but we obeyed the rules of the program and didn't pay a huge amount for the equipment that we purchased. The problem that started the discussion and the comment I made is not whether or not P25 is required. The comments related to dealers that try to sweet talk departments into purchasing something that is proprietary (such as turbo) and painting them into a corner. That is where the rub is and that is the problem...

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    There is no such federal rule. THey defer to your state's communication plan for that. If your state is stupid and requires it even if you only need the analog functions, that sucks. But it isn't a federal requirement to do that.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  14. #14
    Forum Member
    cubachief502's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cuba, Alabama
    Posts
    30

    Default

    If you buy digital... It is to be P25. If you prefer to buy anything else state that in your narrative.

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,596

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    Let me restate what I said earlier. The reason for P25 is INTEROPERABILITY. It is NOT about Chinese manufacturing, greedy corporations, or even firefighter safety. It is all about INTEROPERABILITY!

    As far as benefiting a particular manufacturer, which one exactly would that be? and do you have sales reports to validate your charge? Got to go now. I think I hear black helicopters overhead.....
    The only agencies within 100 miles of us that are using P-25 digital is the Coast guard & one big city. The BIG city has had nothing but problems since they made the switch and has spent double the initial purchase price getting the bugs worked out of the system. No other public safety agencies have made the expensive switch and won't be in the foreseeable future as the state communications guru admits we don't have the infrastructure to make it work.

    We were awarded AFG $$ in 2007 for new radios and comm gear. It did not require us to buy digital p-25 equipment per our states communications plan.

    Yes in some areas of the country bureaucrats that wouldn't recognize a radio if it was inserted into their rectal cavities have bought into the snake oil salesmen"s lies and forced departments to spend huge amounts of $$$$ to buy equipment they will never need All in the buzz word of interoperability. In many cases they are less able to interoperate now than they were before.

    There is one specific manufacturer that has it's sales puke promoting their proprietary system designs as the only solution , when in reality it make their systems less interoperable.
    Don't spout off on things you don't understand

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,596

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    You may want to check out http://falconinfo.blogspot.com/2010/...ing-wrong.html for additional information.
    After reading the link you posted to Falcon radio's blog there are several different mistruths and opinions here.
    First off they are taking offense that a regional chiefs group was promoting a manufacturers product line that they can't supply and then challenging whether or not it meets state & federal guidelines. I'll not presume to blame them for trying to get purchasers to realize that they can sell products that meet the grant guidelines as do many other vendors and manufacturers.

    There is no federal requirement to buy a product that will not improve your communications system. They require that you follow your individual states interoperable communications written plan.
    The only federal mandate at this time is to be narrowband compliant by 2013. period ,end of discussion.

    The folks at Falcon have some good info on their website and some that is not so good.

    There are some manufacturers reps that are selling a bag of sheeet as the only way to get federal dollars is to buy their proprietary products. Worse yet are the county state and local administrators that buy into this and force small departments to spend many times their annual budgets buying radios that don't improve firefighter safety or interoperable communications. Or they are issued a few digital p-25 radios for the chiefs and the rest of the department still has to rely on old analog hi/low band radios for communications.

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long time no Sea
    Posts
    2,253

    Default

    That shows what I know, I thought it had to do with the FCC requirements about narrowbanding set for Jan 1st. 2013. LOL

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,753

    Default

    From the PG:

    The purchase of any communications systems or equipment under this activity should have the intent or goal of solving interoperability problems, as applicable. Each State will have the opportunity to review requests for communications equipment, with respect to conformity with the State Communications Interoperability Plan (SCIP). The State representative will certify that such requests are consistent with the State Homeland Security Strategy and do not duplicate or conflict with assistance already provided or imminent. If a State representative determines that an application is either inconsistent with the State strategy or duplicates the State’s assistance, that portion of the AFG application will not be funded. Further, applicants within States that have not submitted their SCIP to DHS for review and approval will not be eligible for interoperable communications funding. Any applicant seeking funding for eligible equipment should provide details in the narrative section of the application regarding their local plan to enable or enhance interoperable communications within their jurisdiction as well as their efforts to ensure consistency with their State’s interoperability plan.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,995

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    Let me restate what I said earlier. The reason for P25 is INTEROPERABILITY. It is NOT about Chinese manufacturing, greedy corporations, or even firefighter safety. It is all about INTEROPERABILITY!

    As far as benefiting a particular manufacturer, which one exactly would that be? and do you have sales reports to validate your charge? Got to go now. I think I hear black helicopters overhead.....
    Please, tell us - what does P25 have to do with interoperability, that analog does not do?

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default Thanks OneBugle!

    Thank you OneBugle for presenting written documentation as opposed to rumor, conjecture, opinion, or "feelings"; none of which count for anything.

    The facts are there for all who care (or who are capable) to read them. Specifically, the FEMA fire grants are subject to GUIDANCE relating to what is required to be funded. That guidance is developed by SAFECOM, with the mother of them both being DHS. The GUIDANCE is very clear for those who take the trouble of reading it.

    As far as the random allegations posted by a few of the more vocal members, I suggest that if they want closure and consensus on any given topic (like P25 not working, or nobody is using it, or some alleged untruths on the Falcon Blog site), it could be discussed more intelligently (and resolved) with specifics rather than unsubstantiated generalities.

    P25 is here. It is the standard for public safety digital communications. It is not restrictive. It is an open standard and readily available from more manufactures than any other digital offering in the USA, and that's a FACT!

  21. #21
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    Thank you OneBugle for presenting written documentation as opposed to rumor, conjecture, opinion, or "feelings"; none of which count for anything.
    And so far in this thread, you are the only one spouting off rumor, conjecture, opinion, or "feelings". Nothing you've said so far is valid. Everything I and others have said is 100% accurate.

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    The facts are there for all who care (or who are capable) to read them.
    We have read it, many times, long before you arrived here for several years. And it is all the complete opposite of everything you keep blabbing about P25.

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    As far as the random allegations posted by a few of the more vocal members, I suggest that if they want closure and consensus on any given topic (like P25 not working, or nobody is using it, or some alleged untruths on the Falcon Blog site), it could be discussed more intelligently (and resolved) with specifics rather than unsubstantiated generalities.
    Nothing anyone has said here is a random allegation or in any way wrong or made-up. I can go on and on with factual examples, much to your braindead dismay. Your statements are wrong. Go away.

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    P25 is here. It is the standard for public safety digital communications. It is not restrictive. It is an open standard and readily available from more manufactures than any other digital offering in the USA, and that's a FACT!
    What is your point? It is still not required. Analog conventional or any other method that conforms to state and local interoperability needs is accepted and should be. Your trying to create non-existent need.

    In conclusion, please hop along. Your confusing the people who come here for accurate information.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  22. #22
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,995

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopalong View Post
    Thank you OneBugle for presenting written documentation as opposed to rumor, conjecture, opinion, or "feelings"; none of which count for anything.

    The facts are there for all who care (or who are capable) to read them. Specifically, the FEMA fire grants are subject to GUIDANCE relating to what is required to be funded. That guidance is developed by SAFECOM, with the mother of them both being DHS. The GUIDANCE is very clear for those who take the trouble of reading it.

    As far as the random allegations posted by a few of the more vocal members, I suggest that if they want closure and consensus on any given topic (like P25 not working, or nobody is using it, or some alleged untruths on the Falcon Blog site), it could be discussed more intelligently (and resolved) with specifics rather than unsubstantiated generalities.

    P25 is here. It is the standard for public safety digital communications. It is not restrictive. It is an open standard and readily available from more manufactures than any other digital offering in the USA, and that's a FACT!
    The simple facts, as set out by SAFECOM and by DHS. P25 should be bought for a digital radio IF you need digital, and if your SCIP calls for P25.

    If your SCIP called for digital cans and string, that is what DHS would approve, and NOT P25.

    P25 is the standard? You slay me. Which P25? Phase 1 or 2? Trunking or conventional? Which manufacturers add ons? And SAFECOM can call it all the standard they want - when they get into an area that has gone Trbo due to slick salespukes, then that standard ain't squat.

  23. #23
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,995

    Default

    Who are you hopalong? Sales person for ????


    Joined today, and all your posts have been in this thread. Things that make you go Hmmmm.

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default A truism.....

    Once upon a time, long, long ago, I had been transferred by my employer to the upper reaches of the State of Wisconsin. I was involved in a battle which seemed important at the time and was getting beat up pretty bad (new guy against the old guard type situation). One day I was sharing my problems with an older and somewhat wiser gentlemen who gave me some advice that stays with me to this day.

    His immortal words were....
    You can't win peeing contests with skunks.

    He was right!

  25. #25
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    Translation: You have nothing intelligent to ad to this discussion. It's ok, we established that earlier this morning when you first opened your mouth. Thank you for not continuing to spread misinformation and lies to those who ask for help.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. AFG Grant Workshops - Massachusetts
    By onebugle in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-25-2010, 09:28 PM
  2. AFG Regional Grant ?
    By kkresge in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-09-2007, 01:22 AM
  3. PA Farm Safety/Rescue Grant Program
    By EJR in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-27-2006, 09:13 AM
  4. AFG Program Perceptions
    By BC79er_OLDDELETE in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-24-2006, 05:38 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 03-17-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2005, 11:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register