Alfie wrote:voice degradation is a fact with enhanced encryption which is admitted and acknowledged by users, experts and Motorola themselves
Basic is not so noticeable but still has its issues which you can look into
everyone who has used mototrbo/dmr knows what i mean when i say dalek as in the common bad decode it has and this happens more even at a basic enc level at the same range with encode delay and much further at advanced level with added delay. without enc dmr will turn robotic and unintelligible where analogue would still be weak but readable. adding basic enc adds this and a delay and with enhanced enc this is a lot more.
i am not a radio engineer but i can tell you we have had an intense check on our systems. we have an internet linked dmr system and on some far out units enc has been disabled. they can talk and hear on our normal enc channels as they have the enc code programed but they transmit in clear as using enc is less unintelligible. this has been real tested by the radio engineers so i know it to be true as it has been advised and adopted by my workplace on those grounds.
bigboyblue wrote:in case of Basic Privacy, neither requires any modification in the payload
nor any additional headers. Therefore, the System Access Time and the audio quality of a Basic
privacy protected voice is same as that of an unprotected voice.
Davie Boy wrote:bigboyblue wrote:in case of Basic Privacy, neither requires any modification in the payload
nor any additional headers. Therefore, the System Access Time and the audio quality of a Basic
privacy protected voice is same as that of an unprotected voice.
Are you really sure about that...? Using Basic Encryption on DMR does not affect essential communications in any way(s) at all...?
How about with basic analogue and CTCSS and DCS codes... would you also say they do not affect essential communications in any way...?
Metradio wrote:Looks like they are in the midst of changing over today, many channels now DMR..
Mike
bigboyblue wrote:That's a direct copy and paste from the Motorola system planner document itself. Theres a more detailed explanation as well and also goes into how the enhanced encryption works, and also AES256 encryption does too.
bigboyblue wrote:CTCSS and DCS - well as you cant hear those frequencies, then I would say no as well.
Davie Boy wrote:bigboyblue wrote:That's a direct copy and paste from the Motorola system planner document itself. Theres a more detailed explanation as well and also goes into how the enhanced encryption works, and also AES256 encryption does too.
Thanks for that... Motorola have been elaborate with claims in the past... Radio engineers tend to differ on that opinion... the one that I know does in any case... and I have experience of a similar scenario Alfie mentioned where basic privacy on a Moto Cap+ system has been dropped and communications and decoding has got better... I will look into this more...bigboyblue wrote:CTCSS and DCS - well as you cant hear those frequencies, then I would say no as well.
Actually CTCSS and DCS do affect essential communications... which is why the fire service never used them on analogue fireground... there is a delay before the squelch opens... even more so with DCS... this is why we took DCS off our analogue radios as the delay before opening the squelch was very noticeable...
Return to English Frequencies by Area
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests