RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Service Specific Monitoring > Federal Monitoring Forum


Federal Monitoring Forum - The place to discuss monitoring federal government communications and related topics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1041 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2018, 4:53 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wichita Falls, TX
Posts: 7,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DHAS12 View Post
170.725 full scale in Kingman Arizona. 167 NAC encrypted.
Most likely it is FBI.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #1042 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2018, 8:06 AM
DaveNF2G's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rensselaer, NY
Posts: 8,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DHAS12 View Post
170.725 full scale in Kingman Arizona. 167 NAC encrypted.
That NAC is usually associated with the FBI and their comms tend to be encrypted.
__________________
David T. Stark
NF2G WQMY980 KYR7128
ARRL VE & Registered Licensing Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #1043 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2018, 7:38 AM
ecps92's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Taxachusetts
Posts: 9,663
Default

As to the ENC - Not everywhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveNF2G View Post
That NAC is usually associated with the FBI and their comms tend to be encrypted.
__________________
Bill N1KUG
Cruise Ship Frequencies
http://www.scanmaritime.com
Reply With Quote
  #1044 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2018, 1:15 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kingman Arizona.
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecps92 View Post
As to the ENC - Not everywhere
Do they sometimes use partial encryption? On the other repeaters that I was hearing simultaneously, the E for encryption wasn't showing up, but I wasn't getting a very good decode because they were farther away.
Reply With Quote
  #1045 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2018, 1:30 PM
ecps92's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Taxachusetts
Posts: 9,663
Default

My monitoring experience has shown the use of ENC varies wildly and I do not rely on the RRDB to flag those reported as 100% ENC

So, you were hearing the same traffic on more than one Repeater?
Likely a wide-area Vote-Scan like CBP/BP and ICE are using in AZ
What were those other FBI channels ?

IF it is a wide-area Net. it will be what-ever selection the user is set for.
ENC will not vary by Repeater.

There are, and could be in your area Repeaters where the users are STRAPPED
for 100% ENC, but then even some of those have shown some Non ENC with a little monitoring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHAS12 View Post
Do they sometimes use partial encryption? On the other repeaters that I was hearing simultaneously, the E for encryption wasn't showing up, but I wasn't getting a very good decode because they were farther away.
__________________
Bill N1KUG
Cruise Ship Frequencies
http://www.scanmaritime.com
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #1046 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2018, 1:39 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kingman Arizona.
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecps92 View Post
My monitoring experience has shown the use of ENC varies wildly and I do not rely on the RRDB to flag those reported as 100% ENC

So, you were hearing the same traffic on more than one Repeater?
Likely a wide-area Vote-Scan like CBP/BP and ICE are using in AZ
What were those other FBI channels ?

IF it is a wide-area Net. it will be what-ever selection the user is set for.
ENC will not vary by Repeater.

There are, and could be in your area Repeaters where the users are STRAPPED
for 100% ENC, but then even some of those have shown some Non ENC with a little monitoring.
I'm not 100% sure if it was the same traffic. But I was scanning through the federal VHF band, and I picked up the frequency I asked about full scale, encrypted, then I continued scanning and picked up 2 other repeaters that I was not able to decode fully. They may have been something else. I can't remember what the other frequencies were because I didn't save them.
Reply With Quote
  #1047 (permalink)  
Old 05-18-2018, 1:45 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 250
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecps92 View Post
IF it is a wide-area Net. it will be what-ever selection the user is set for. ENC will not vary by Repeater.

There are, and could be in your area Repeaters where the users are STRAPPED
for 100% ENC, but then even some of those have shown some Non ENC with a little monitoring.
Up in this part of the country the ENC is purely decided by user and/or radio settings. If the user has the ENC switch enabled then traffic will be ENC. It seems that there are quite a few radios however that don't have the proper ENC configuration.

Oddly, the most consistent ENC has been from USCG. They generally have one conventional frequency that is about 50% ENC. The others are nearly 100% ENC but I'm guessing it's still radio dependent.
Reply With Quote
  #1048 (permalink)  
Old 06-27-2018, 12:55 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 250
Default

413.2000 $293 RID 21000xx

Any ideas?
Reply With Quote
  #1049 (permalink)  
Old 06-27-2018, 6:28 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wichita Falls, TX
Posts: 7,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by devicelab View Post
413.2000 $293 RID 21000xx

Any ideas?
Where was it heard? Any military bases nearby?
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #1050 (permalink)  
Old 06-27-2018, 1:30 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 250
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by nd5y View Post
Where was it heard? Any military bases nearby?
See my above location. JBLM is pretty far... 20 miles plus... and reception is nil from my location.

I did catch a few in-the-clear transmissions but they were fringy at best. I'll post the clearest one later today. It was basically one unit calling another unit and then the transmission started to drop out. "107 [to] 57" ...something like that.
Reply With Quote
  #1051 (permalink)  
Old 06-28-2018, 5:33 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Bothell, WA
Posts: 250
Default

Audio clip from 413.2:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o8g6jzbzhrgrkql/008.mp3?raw=1
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions