Palm Springs Radio

[inlandpatch]

i was talking to one of the Palm Springs reserve officer's and asked him about the radio system and i asked him if all channels where encrypted (which i found out via radioreference.com) and he said except for their ch1 because of the "media" so called sued them for public information type of deal. would any of you know if this is true, that Palm Springs PD channel 1 is NOT encrypted? if not what are the frequencies/trucked control channel

 

[kma371]

i was talking to one of the Palm Springs reserve officer's and asked him about the radio system and i asked him if all channels where encrypted (which i found out via radioreference.com) and he said except for their ch1 because of the "media" so called sued them for public information type of deal. would any of you know if this is true, that Palm Springs PD channel 1 is NOT encrypted? if not what are the frequencies/trucked control channel

http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=5774

This is the system but it says palm springs is encrypted

 

[inlandpatch]

Eastern Riverside County Interoperable Communications Authority (ERICA) Trunking System, Indio, California - Scanner Frequencies

This is the system but it says palm springs is encrypted

ya that's what i looked at and was thinking was just wondering if their is like a "hidden" freq that the general pub does not know of. but thanks!

 

[kma371]

No I don't think there's anything hidden.

Most radio users know nothing about their own system, except that they are on channel 1.

 

[inlandpatch]

No I don't think there's anything hidden.

Most radio users know nothing about their own system, except that they are on channel 1.

True!

 

[karldotcom]

I seem to remember a guy suing a couple years ago over this.

 

[mikkut]

Noticed these VHF ERICA licenses a while back ... I don't live in the area so I can't vouch for what these are used for ... perhaps there is a PSPD ch. 1 simulcast on one of these? Can someone in the area give a listen to these?

Eastern Riverside County Interoperable Communications Authority
[GOVERNMENT ENTITY RADIOS USED FOR OFFICIAL AND ESSENTIAL COMMUNICATION]
Control Point 1 - 200 S CIVIC DR, PALM SPRINGS CA 619-323-8109
ULS License - Public Safety Pool, Conventional License - KFT266 - Eastern Riverside County Interoperable Communications Authority
12/22/2011 License Modified
1 - CA Land Mobile Control Station Meeting 20 Rule
153.995 FX1 25p 25e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
2 - EDOM HILL 6 MI NE, PALM SPRINGS (RIVERSIDE) CA
33.866694,-116.433333 - Google Maps
155.715 FB2 70p 100e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
155.94 FB 70p 100e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
3 - 3111 E TAHQUITZ MC CALLUM WAY, PALM SPRINGS (RIVERSIDE) CA
33.822527,-116.511416 - Google Maps
155.715 FB2 55p 100e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
4 - 277 N AVENIDA CABALLEROS, PALM SPRINGS (RIVERSIDE) CA
33.826138,-116.538916 - Google Maps
155.715 FB2 70p 100e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
5 - 16.0 km radius around fixed location 2
153.995 MO 25p 25e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
155.715 MO 25p 25e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
155.895 MO 5p 5e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
155.37 FX1 45p 90e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
2 - WHITE WATER HILL, PALM SPRINGS (RIVERSIDE) CA
33.922250,-116.617527 - Google Maps
159.03 FB2 75p 100e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
3 - 11-711 WEST DR, DESERT HOT SPRINGS (RIVERSIDE) CA
33.961111,-116.504166 - Google Maps
159.03 FB 45p 90e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
4 - 48.0 km radius around fixed location 2
155.37 MO 60p 60e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E
159.03 MO 60p 60e 20K0F3E 11K2F3E

 

[Oakland_Tower]

It could be true. Here is the encryption policy for the new East Bay Regional Comm System up here in the Bay Area (from their Nov 2011 Newsletter):

The encryption policy for the EBRCS is that
1. Talkgroups are either always encrypted or never encrypted; it is not selectable by the user.
2. Main dispatch talkgroups should never be encrypted. 3. Encrypted talkgroups that are shared by multiple agencies must use AES encryption as
the encryption method.
The rationale for the above policy revolves around safety and interoperability. By not allowing users to select whether to transmit clear or encrypted but rather select the correct talkgroup avoids the possibility of user error. Sensitive communications could be transmitted in the clear while the user believes he or she are transmitting encrypted and could end up compromising operations.
By not allowing main dispatch talkgroups to be encrypted, agencies avoid potential public relations problems over freedom of information, “Big Brother”, etc. In addition some manufacturers in order to meet FIPS 140-2 requirements will wipe or zeroize their encryption key if the radio enters an error condition. Once the key is wiped the radio can no longer access an encrypted talkgroup, which could be problematic if the main dispatch channel is encrypted.

 

[SCPD]

No I don't think there's anything hidden.

Most radio users know nothing about their own system, except that they are on channel 1.

Law enforcement officers, especially at the municipal level, don't know much about what their radios can do. They may understand how to flip through the channels to operate on a adjacent division's frequency, pull up a couple of local tacticals and some citywide tacticals but that is usually the extent of their knowledge.

Firefighters, especially at the county level and above, and in rural areas are usually more radio savvy. When a message such as "all units on the xx incident switch to NIFC Tac 1" they know enough to find it in their radios quickly and a lot of them know many of the frequencies corresponding to such alphanumeric names.

I've known quite a few federal firefighters that can recite the frequencies of their home units and quite a few of the NIFC tacticals. They also know the conditions that the use of various frequencies have.

Cops don't work mutual aid incidents as often as firefighters do, especially those firefighters that work wildland fire. Cops have enough to keep track of for their own safety without trying to understand their radios as well as firefighters do.

 

[Ben96cal]

re:

Law enforcement officers, especially at the municipal level, don't know much about what their radios can do. They may understand how to flip through the channels to operate on a adjacent division's frequency, pull up a couple of local tacticals and some citywide tacticals but that is usually the extent of their knowledge.

Firefighters, especially at the county level and above, and in rural areas are usually more radio savvy. When a message such as "all units on the xx incident switch to NIFC Tac 1" they know enough to find it in their radios quickly and a lot of them know many of the frequencies corresponding to such alphanumeric names.

I've known quite a few federal firefighters that can recite the frequencies of their home units and quite a few of the NIFC tacticals. They also know the conditions that the use of various frequencies have.

Cops don't work mutual aid incidents as often as firefighters do, especially those firefighters that work wildland fire. Cops have enough to keep track of for their own safety without trying to understand their radios as well as firefighters do.

It always cracks me up when press releases for new trunk systems tout the "interoperability" of the system allowing Pd and FD to talk to each other when many jurisdictions have policies that all communication goes through respective dispatches and not "car to car". in the 25 years I've been scanning i've never heard a PD unit talk to an FD unit over the radio.

 

[SCPD]

It always cracks me up when press releases for new trunk systems tout the "interoperability" of the system allowing Pd and FD to talk to each other when many jurisdictions have policies that all communication goes through respective dispatches and not "car to car". in the 25 years I've been scanning i've never heard a PD unit talk to an FD unit over the radio.

I listened to a large fire incident located in downtown L.A. a few years back. A LAPD tac was patched to a LAFD tac. It was mostly used for sergeant to battalion chief communications regarding traffic control. In small towns it happens all the time and in the town I live in where snow removal is a large workload the PD talks with the road department on a regular basis. Except for the state almost every agency in the two county region I live in uses VHF-Hi. I frequently used my 120 channel mobile to talk with the water district, town road department and all the law enforcement agencies. There isn't any need to talk about interoperabiity because we already have it. The CHP, State Parks and Caltrans use other bands as does Socal Edison and Mammoth Mountain Ski Area but Fish and Game and Cal Fire are both on VHF-Hi.

 

[seh911]

It always cracks me up when press releases for new trunk systems tout the "interoperability" of the system allowing Pd and FD to talk to each other when many jurisdictions have policies that all communication goes through respective dispatches and not "car to car". in the 25 years I've been scanning i've never heard a PD unit talk to an FD unit over the radio.

Many of the more savvy FF in the northern San Diego County area will talk on Sheriff talkgroups to detemine if they are clear to enter a scene, especially later at night.

 

[rananthony04]

It always cracks me up when press releases for new trunk systems tout the "interoperability" of the system allowing Pd and FD to talk to each other when many jurisdictions have policies that all communication goes through respective dispatches and not "car to car". in the 25 years I've been scanning i've never heard a PD unit talk to an FD unit over the radio.

I've heard LA County 'Station 29'(Baldwin Park) on Baldwin Park's Police dispatch channel on numerous occasions-mostly for coordination efforts.

 

[seh911]

It always cracks me up when press releases for new trunk systems tout the "interoperability" of the system allowing Pd and FD to talk to each other when many jurisdictions have policies that all communication goes through respective dispatches and not "car to car". in the 25 years I've been scanning i've never heard a PD unit talk to an FD unit over the radio.

Also, you are trying to define "interoperability" only as to direct person-to-person communications in the field. While as noted above, this CAN and does occur, it is not the norm. This does not mean interoperability does not exist.

The purpose of interoperability (and I suppose the "touting" thereof) is to allow AGENCIES who historically could not talk to each other directly on radio to easily do so. San Diego's county RCS system is a great example. There are multiple common talkgroups that allow people who traditionally would not communcate with each other to immediately do so. The fact that the traffic is most commonly passed through dispatchers does not change this.