[TrunkCom] Re: 220 Detroit

[Jerry]

Because the system is for dispatch only and not for actual 
fire operations there doesn't seem to be an issue.  My 
understanding is that digital is in the future.  Because 
tones and digital don't get along very well the 220 ACSB 
system was the route to take.

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:09:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeff Kenyon <at649 at tcnet.org>
Subject: Re: [TrunkCom] Re:220 Detroit
To: Discussion of Monitoring Trunk Radio Systems
 <trunkcom at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: 
<Pine.LNX.4.58.0410241309090.24505 at hendryx.tcnet.org>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

How well is this working for users?  This would seem to be a 
challenge in
different buildings and structures wouldn't it?  What would 
atract users
to these types of systems and what types of users are on 
these systems?

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Jerry wrote:

> The SSB sounding stuff could very well be Amplitude
> Compandored Sideband.  For example, one of the 
> communication
> dispatch centers in the suburbs of Chicago is using the 
> 220
> ACSB frequencies for fire department dispatching.

Jerry
Midwest Grant Pages
http://ilgrant.home.att.net