Welcome to the Future of Scanners.. Or is there..?

[Motoballa]

So.. With new trunking systems, and encryption, whats going to be the real point of having a scanner some years from now besides maybe ham or frs/gmrs? I don't see a real point. Soon, well already, we have and are going to have encrypted trunking systems or even just encrypted whatever in general. I mean were spending 300 dollars on a decent scanner, with updates coming out every month its going to be pointless soon. I don't hate scanners, I just hate the encryption part. Even businesses! What are y'alls thoughts?

 

[pinballwiz86]

Do you know how many thousands upon thousands of police agencies are out there? With budget cuts? I would not worry about them all going encrypted anytime soon.

If they do? There is military aviation, civil aviation, fire, ems, GMRS, FRS, MURS, amateur radio, railroads, CB radio, marine radio, baby monitors, local businesses, car races, etc. etc. etc.

The hobby will never die. Don't be so pessimistic my friend.

 

[CrabbyMilton]

Anyone who knows me will tell you that I can be the most pessimistic old curmudgeons when it comes to things many times. However, while it can be a pain and disappointing when our favorite monitoring target goes way, there are many things that are still in the clear analog and likely will never or many many years away from monitoring. As pinballwiz86 said, not every public safety agency will go digital next week. Just think back to the first time when you got your first scanner. You may have put it in search just to see what's out there. That's what I did almost 36 years ago and it was fun and amazing and still is since I set aside one day out of the week to concentrate on a specific band or group of talk groups or frequencies.
My cities fire and police departments went to OPEN SKY a few years ago and while I didn't like that, our county system is on trunked 800 and there in plenty to hear and in fact, the fire department patches a fire ground coms to the system now so now I can hear that when I couldn't before when they were on low power simplex. You win some you lose some. I also discovered those elderly and disabled van services that be a hoot at busy times. Yes there is plenty to hear just use your imagination, what interests you, and your geographic location and you may be surprised.
If many years from now scanning as we know it completely goes away and I mean nothing at all hey, there is a world out there.

 

[br0adband]

As noted, encryption can be put to use but typically most (and by most I mean the majority) of systems worldwide still don't use it and when they do they tend to encrypt specific channels that just need to have it in use (and on those channels or talkgroups it's understood, like perhaps a S.W.A.T. channel where you really wouldn't want someone in a hostage situation being able to monitor every transmission they happen to be making in the process of a potential incursion or rescue, obviously).

The point being: encryption does serve a purpose. I'm a person that's been monitoring for many many years, several decades actually (since the early 1970s) and I understand that some stuff shouldn't be on the airwaves and if it does happen then encryption becomes a way to ensure even if someone keys up a mic and spills the beans so to speak the info is still "safe" from the casual or even somewhat dedicated monitor - and yes, criminals and ne'er do wells included.

I fully believe that as a member of the general public that we as citizens do have a right to monitor our public safety services to some degrees - it's pretty commonly understood that typical dispatch channels are acceptable to monitor without issues but when it comes to tactical, narcotics, investigations, and many other types of traffic that stuff is best kept under wraps which means encrypted and I don't have any problems with that. My problems come in when a radio system is put into use (be it analog or digital) and the people in charge of creating the system or managing it decides to encrypt all of it start to finish with nothing being available for monitoring by the general public.

There's a difference between having a radio system that cannot be monitored because there are no scanners that can decode the content (OpenSky is one such system) or software applications that could potentially decode the content (like DSD or DSD+) and having a system that can be monitored either directly by scanners or by using (again) software like DSD or DSD+ but it's encrypted which would then slam the door on potential monitoring.

Honestly encryption has always been and will always be a hot-button topic in this community, you'll find those that are totally for it 24/7 on any and all systems, and then you'll have the rest of us like myself that say "I got no beef with some sensitive content being encrypted but I believe there needs to be an accommodation made for the general public to be able to monitor what's going on as long as it actually IS something that can be monitored with available technology." For OpenSky, there's just no technology, period, aside from those actual units on that system and the general public just can't get that kind of hardware for a variety of reasons.

Even ProVoice - the not quite so popular in terms of widespread use but in the areas it is used in they happen to have fairly large populations and systems as recently shown by Uniden's addition of ProVoice decoding for their latest scanners as a pay-for-play upgrade) has been able to be monitored for some time using DSD+ but the majority of people won't go that far to do it, they just accept that no scanner could do it and that was that. But of course that's changed now with that Uniden upgrade that adds support for it and a lot of people are very happy about now being able to listen in.

But enough of my babbling: there are dozens upon dozens of threads here at RR about this kind of topic including encryption so, rambling through past threads or doing a search for "encryption" in the topics of the threads specifically can net you a great deal of info and opinions.

For a few years the residents of Las Vegas and nearby cities couldn't monitor our own Metro PD because they were using OpenSky - that system was basically garbage and they eventually moved over to a P25 Phase II system which has been up and running for roughly a year now with testing phases before it went "live" 24/7. Luckily, they're leaving the dispatch channels open at least for now so that we're able to monitor those comms which is greatly appreciated by myself and many others. The rest of the system is encrypted and I have no issues with that at all as long as they do keep the dispatch ones available.

We got lucky with this particular situation, that's not to say at some point they won't just flip that switch and encrypt everything leaving residents high and dry, but it's always possible.

As far as trunking itself is concerned, I've yet to see a system that can't be followed properly these days using Unitrunker or perhaps the donation version of DSD+ aka the "fast lane" release which I believe can do DMR/TRBO system trunking now and maybe even NXDN too (I don't know about either of those 100% so I could be wrong on that). Trunking isn't a problem and I don't expect it to factor into the situation but, I'm speaking as someone that doesn't even own a physical scanner anymore - I use my laptop and some "cheap USB TV tuners" aka RTL sticks to do all my monitoring duties so, the sky's the limit as long as someone is able to create software applications to control the hardware and decode the signals.

 

[dsalomon]

The hobby is definitely not dead. As others have mentioned, there will always be agencies that simply do not have the budget for digital, much less trunked and encrypted systems. Some agencies are just using cell phones for some sensitive one to one communications Vs dishing out many $$$ for a high end trunking, encryption capable system. Also, let's not forget that eventually some of the specs on encoding/decoding "accidentally" become public knowledge, making them a target for software developers to incorporate into packages such as DSD+. I'm NOT implying that the DSD+ folks have done anything wrong...just using them as an example of how hobby software can be developed to provide additional methods of providing solutions to what might otherwise be inaccessible.

Re: encryption, my 2 cents worth is that any agency has the right to secure their communications, within the appropriate laws. There are many reasons NOT to encrypt and most law enforcement agencies know that having routine communications in the clear can actually be a good thing. Setting aside the fact that the bad guys can also listen, it shows the public and the media that their public service agencies are providing a valuable service to them.

Let's not forget the HUGE value of interoperability. If every agency in every small town went digital/trunked/fully encrypted (7x24), that completely shuts off communications with their neighboring towns. I know of many small towns that put radios in their cars that cover not only their own communications systems, but also those of their neighboring towns (and program them to do so). They know the value of more open communications vs less open.

Also, what about the trend of groups of agencies getting together to share the cost and benefits of systems? For example, look at Coweta County, GA. This entire county is now on WARRS (Western Area Regional Radio System Authority). This is a system shared by 4 counties, each of which was previously on its own system. WARRS is a P25 phase 1 system, so nothing special other than the fact that there are now 4 counties with vastly better radio communication abilities than they had previously on their individual systems, plus interoperability. Another example is the TACN, or Tennessee Advanced Communications Network, which has 5 counties on it.

So, these are my thoughts on just public agency monitoring. As others have said, there are many other things out there to monitor. Use your search function, or just spin the dial, regardless of whether it's a hardware or software dial/search.
http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=5078

 

[ab3a]

First, encryption is one thing, However, interoperability is another. These goals are almost mutually exclusive. Everyone has to practice using non-encrypted communications so that they can work with adjacent municipalities.

Second, Key Management is a big deal. Most organizations do it very poorly. Even if the encryption algorithm is very hard to undo, many systems will fail because of how the keys are managed.

Third, even if both of the above are perfect, you still have the meta data of who is transmitting on what group ID, who else transmits on that group ID, and how long each message is, and how frequent they are. One can infer a lot from this sort of thing.

I think it is healthy that federal officers, police, fire, and other government officials realize that even though the content of their transmissions may not be known, a lot can be learned from the meta-data. I think it is also nearly essential for central dispatchers to be on an unencrypted channel. Otherwise there is too much chance that major chunks of information may get missed by some remote stations.

So I don't think things are as bleak as they might seem.

 

[SouthernRoller]

No matter how bleak things may seem in the scanner world, I for one think there will always be something to hear.. Like my hometown here, FD, EMS, PD, and SO are all still analog, with no immediate plans of going digital anytime in the foreseeable future...

 

[Voyager]

So.. With new trunking systems, and encryption,

New trunking systems will likely be added. There has recently (this month) been a revitalization of scanners that have added one new format. Hopefully there will be more to come - eventually including all new modes except encryption of course. That will never happen without an FCC rule change and even then would not be easy.

We need congress to pass a law that PS dispatch and routine ops channels cannot be encrypted so as to ensure transparency - a sort of Sunshine Law for scanners. Too many PS agencies are hiding their activity from the public who has a right to know what they are doing.

 

[marksmith]

The fact that two companies can charge $400-500 for radios is testimony to the fact that there is something to listen to.

Not every public service agency out there has a plan to encrypt communications. Some find it a positive to not encrypt.

If we start getting to the point that things are so encrypted that the news media can't find out what is going on you will hear such an uproar about agencies hiding their activities that those agencies will be under the gun to justify their encryption or eliminate it.

For now, I have lots to listen to.

Mark
WS1095/536/436/996P2/HP1e/HP2e/996XT/325P2/396XT/PRO668/PSR800/PRO652

 

[bharvey2]

While some entities around the Bay Area have gone encrypted, the bulk are not. I suspect it will lean toward more encryption in the long run but as others have said, cost and public outcry will slow the progression. However, there is still plenty to listen to. Even if everything goes full encryption or unscanable modes are developed, you can always keep your scanner on your belt as a way to pick up girls.

 

[wbswetnam]

I agree... there are still many things out there to listen to, even if your local PD, and Fire, and EMS go "silent". One thing I have enjoyed listening to over the years is radio communications of public schools. As with most local PD traffic, most comms are mundane, ie., "Mr. Duggart where are you?" but also there are fights, kids passing out, etc. Also, don't forget the school buses. There have been lots of times I have heard school bus drivers sobbing over the radio with the roar of out-of-control kids in the background... great stuff...

 

[wbswetnam]

Something else interesting to monitor - airline operations comms between commercial aircraft and their home bases / hubs. Many times if there is a problem on board a flight, you can hear the pilots reporting the problem to the company - unruly passengers, sick passengers, mechanical problems, etc. it can be quite interesting sometimes. Yesterday I was monitoring an American Eagle pilot reporting a passenger who had passed out on board and the pilot was discussing where to divert the flight for an emergency landing so the sick passenger could be rushed to a hospital. Here are a few frequencies to plug in: Southwest Airlines 131.7000, American Eagle 131.025 and 129.200, Continental Airlines 129.675, Delta 131.450 and 131.850. There are others - consult airport data within 300 miles of where you live, and major flight paths within 100 miles of where you live. All of these frequencies are AM mode, BTW.

 

[stingray327]

So.. With new trunking systems, and encryption, whats going to be the real point of having a scanner some years from now besides maybe ham or frs/gmrs? I don't see a real point. Soon, well already, we have and are going to have encrypted trunking systems or even just encrypted whatever in general. I mean were spending 300 dollars on a decent scanner, with updates coming out every month its going to be pointless soon. I don't hate scanners, I just hate the encryption part. Even businesses! What are y'alls thoughts?

I agree with you. I hate encryption as it takes away from our hobby.

 

[KA2ZEY]

Encryption sucks but there is still plenty to listen to.

 

[stingray327]

Encryption sucks but there is still plenty to listen to.

I hope so. We need more to keep this hobby alive.

 

[AC2OY]

I think there will be always something to listen to out there. Other night or last few nights I noticed I'm not hearing too much activity as far as my town's police department. I decided to unlock everything I had locked out of skipped in my GRE PSR 800 after I did that the thing wouldn't shut up....still no Belleville Police but I forgot how other things were programmed in. My point being is that for sometime,there will be things to monitor or listen to.

 

[yaesu_dave]

Here in Northern Utah there are virtually NO public safety agencies using encryption except for the Life Flight and Air Med helicopter services, and that's probably because of the HIPPA laws. Encryption capabilities exist on UCAN, the statewide public safety Motorola trunking system, but 98% of transmissions are in the clear. In fact, some of the local LEO's have "gone retro" in recent months and are using frequencies in the 154-156 MHz range for car to car chit-chat. Mostly it's the cops working DUI enforcement shifts that use the VHF frequencies, and they are VERY candid about their encounters with drunks and dopers. My guess is that they're using VHF instead of 800 MHz because VHF simplex has a relatively short range, especially when you're surrounded by mountains.

Some of the funniest things I've heard on my scanners have come from listening to the local Wal-Mart employees on the "colored dot" VHF/UHF frequencies, especially between Thanksgiving and New Year's when the stores are the busiest. Other good monitoring targets are the local cab company and construction crews. Those construction workers don't hold back when expressing their displeasure about the foreman, job site, other employees, etc. Monitoring the railroad channels (which still haven't switched to narrow band in the Ogden/Salt Lake area) can be interesting as well, especially in the wee hours of the morning. The railroad employees are only slightly less candid than the local construction workers in expressing their opinions!

 

[Voyager]

Here in Northern Utah there are virtually NO public safety agencies using encryption except for the Life Flight and Air Med helicopter services, and that's probably because of the HIPPA laws.

There is no reason they should be giving out patient names, so there should be no HIIPA issues.

 

[Spitfire8520]

Here in Northern Utah there are virtually NO public safety agencies using encryption except for the Life Flight and Air Med helicopter services, and that's probably because of the HIPPA laws.

There is no reason they should be giving out patient names, so there should be no HIIPA issues.

Along with the above, HIPPA does not require encryption of radio communications. Such information that is revealed through such means is considered an incidental disclosure. If the medical provider wants to encrypt for additional privacy, then that is their own decision and not a legal requirement.

Source: 197-Does HIPAA require providers to soundproof walls to avoid conversations being overheard | HHS.gov

For example, the Privacy Rule does not require the following types of structural or systems changes:

• Private rooms.
• Soundproofing of rooms.
• Encryption of wireless or other emergency medical radio communications which can be intercepted by scanners.
• Encryption of telephone systems.

 

[pb_lonny]

I have been hearing this for the last 15 years, I am still enjoying the hobby....