RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > U.S. Regional Radio Discussion Forums > Texas Radio Discussion Forum

Texas Radio Discussion Forum Forum for discussing Radio Information in the State of Texas.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 10:02 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fort Worth Texas
Posts: 128
Default

Anyone have ears on the Mansfield site? They have transitioned over according to those that listen on a regular basis to them. I barely hear them in North Fort Worth on their old system so I never noticed it
__________________
jasday
PRO 106-BC246T-BC996XT
Fort Worth Texas
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 02-22-2014, 9:24 AM
Ensnared's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 2,044
Default Houston PD

Quote:
Originally Posted by car55 View Post
I had no idea they where encrypted.I'm sure others can say more about this but when I was in Fort Worth they hardly like to dispatch calls over the radio.I would hear send me this domestic ,send me this flight call ,send me this disturbance call so on.I was not impressed with Fort worth PD one bit.May be it was the time of day or dispatcher. So may be most of the time they where not like that?

I find Dallas police and Houston police to be more talkative on the radio.With Houston being the most than Dallas.

The only thing I found Fort worth police over Dallas police is there is way more car to car talking with Fort worth police!! Where Dallas police seem to just like to dispatch calls and very little if any talking about the call.

So I don't know if that had any thing to do with why they want encryption.
How long has it been since you listened to Houston PD? The new radio system has a great deal of encryption being used. At present, there is a government layer for those who don't own a Phase II scanner. Even with a Phase II scanner, you will be hearing mostly dispatch channels, not talk, tactical, etc. The Investigative Operation talk groups are mostly encrypted. I don't see one talk channel for Houston. They operate on TxWarn P25.
__________________
“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” Christopher Hitchens.
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 03-09-2014, 5:55 PM
Banned for duplicate accounts
   
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensnared View Post
How long has it been since you listened to Houston PD? The new radio system has a great deal of encryption being used. At present, there is a government layer for those who don't own a Phase II scanner. Even with a Phase II scanner, you will be hearing mostly dispatch channels, not talk, tactical, etc. The Investigative Operation talk groups are mostly encrypted. I don't see one talk channel for Houston. They operate on TxWarn P25.
It was before the switch over.The police seem more chatty with dispatch and other officers on the call.

Dallas police hardly like to tallk on the radio even big calls like large fight calls ,shooting ,B&E or robbery.

When I was in Dallas I never hear perimeter setup when tracking a suspect on foot wated for B&E or robbery.I neve hear victim updates info on MVA calls ,shooting or stabbing calls.

When going to hot call and person has a knife or gun in side the house , I never hear police sergeant say do not enter the house to I get there and ask dispatch for more units.


I find Dallas police hardly like to use their radio other than to dispatch calls.There is very little if any update on the call.

Well Fort Worth PD seems to like to use MDT to dispatch calls and bit more car to car traffic. There was call for guy stealing car batteries and they where very chatty about that call.But there was domestic calls , flight call , disturbance call so on and police officer was telling dispatch to send him or her the call.

The dispatch never gone verbal with these call most of the time.May be it was that dispatcher.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 03-09-2014, 7:06 PM
Texas DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 1,264
Default

Dallas Police operate on conventional repeaters which gives them some functionality you don't get with trunked systems. Dallas likes to talk simplex on the repeater outputs. That's where all this chatter occurs and there is a lot of it. You just have to be in the area to hear it. It gets very interesting at times.

Russell
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 03-22-2014, 3:11 PM
MesquiteWx's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell View Post
Dallas Police operate on conventional repeaters which gives them some functionality you don't get with trunked systems. Dallas likes to talk simplex on the repeater outputs. That's where all this chatter occurs and there is a lot of it. You just have to be in the area to hear it. It gets very interesting at times.

Russell
Yep, he is right. You find the good DPD channels they won't shut up. They do a lot by MDC though as well. If they bore you then go to DSO. Now they do everything by radio and they will drive you insane listening to them as they have more traffic that you can listen to.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 03-27-2014, 7:54 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 56
Default

Sounds like Forest Hill switched to the digital system today. Fire Dispatch seems to be 6086, PD Patrol on 6118. Also heard testing on 6120, 6128 and 6130- all on Layer 2.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2014, 10:47 AM
Ensnared's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 2,044
Default FW Regional, Very Confused Listener

I understand that the FW Regional system is in the process of installation; however, I am rather confused about the FW layers 1 & 2. I see where the FWFD is under layer 2, but, I cannot figure out layer 1. I have looked in the Wiki, but find myself very confused at this point in time. I am assuming that the FCC callsigns site map is future-oriented & not complete.

When I looked at the Location Data Site Map, I am not seeing any layer 1.

I would appreciate any help.
__________________
“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” Christopher Hitchens.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2014, 11:51 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wichita Falls, TX
Posts: 4,180
Default

The way I understand it layers 1 and 2 are two simulcast "sites" that are really separate systems. Each "site" appears to share the same 6 or 7 transmitter locations but with a different set of frequencies.

I haven't been able to directly monitor it or run Unitrunker on it so I don't know exactly what they are doing. The database is probably incomplete. The FCC Callsign map will show where all the transmit sites are but the RR Location map may not be accurate.
__________________
Tom

Last edited by nd5y; 04-19-2014 at 11:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2014, 1:50 PM
Texas DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 1,264
Default

Tom is correct. On this system, Layer 1 and Layer 2 cover the same geographic area. Some agencies are on Layer 1 and some are on Layer 2. The idea is to keep it balanced and provide some sort of redundancy. However, sharing tower sites does reduce the redundancy somewhat if, for example, a tornado takes out a tower or two then it also takes out both layers and all the radio in the areas served by those towers. The system admin has the capability to push traffic to either layer with this type of set up so monitoring with a scanner can get a bit tricky. I would program the system twice, one as Layer 1 and one as Layer 2 - two systems. Then program all talkgroups into both systems.

Russell
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 04-20-2014, 9:45 AM
Ensnared's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 2,044
Default Like GATTRS?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell View Post
Tom is correct. On this system, Layer 1 and Layer 2 cover the same geographic area. Some agencies are on Layer 1 and some are on Layer 2. The idea is to keep it balanced and provide some sort of redundancy. However, sharing tower sites does reduce the redundancy somewhat if, for example, a tornado takes out a tower or two then it also takes out both layers and all the radio in the areas served by those towers. The system admin has the capability to push traffic to either layer with this type of set up so monitoring with a scanner can get a bit tricky. I would program the system twice, one as Layer 1 and one as Layer 2 - two systems. Then program all talkgroups into both systems.

Russell
Thanks for the explanation. From what people have told me, GATTRS functions in this same style where they can switch layers.

At this point in time, I might just assign FW TG's to both layers in a separate loading of the TSYS. That is, TG's under layer 1 and then layer 2.
__________________
“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” Christopher Hitchens.
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 04-21-2014, 9:44 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Fort Worth TX
Posts: 23
Default Kennedale

Did Kennedale FD and PD make the switch to digital yet and if they did does anyone have the talk groups?
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 04-21-2014, 9:54 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fort Worth Texas
Posts: 128
Default

Kennedale moved dispatch into Mansfield and are using their tgs. They are on Layer 2 as well as the Mansfield sites.
__________________
jasday
PRO 106-BC246T-BC996XT
Fort Worth Texas
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 04-21-2014, 6:59 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasday View Post
Kennedale moved dispatch into Mansfield and are using their tgs. They are on Layer 2 as well as the Mansfield sites.
Kennedale has been using the following talkgroups. Fire is dispatched by Mansfield on Mansfield Fire talkgroup 6163

6618 PD Patrol
6620 PD Patrol 2
6622 PD Talk 1
6624 PD Tac 1
6628 PD Detail 1
6636 FD Fire 1- Primary response talkgroup
6638 FD Fire 2
6640 FD Fire 3
6642 FD Fire 4
6650 Heard fire training on this talkgroup, but sounded like Mansfield
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2014, 8:29 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fort Worth Texas
Posts: 128
Default

Eric, is this on the P25? I haven't heard them on analog in a while, and I'm pretty sure I heard them on the Mansfield response channels the other day.
__________________
jasday
PRO 106-BC246T-BC996XT
Fort Worth Texas
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2014, 6:40 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasday View Post
Eric, is this on the P25? I haven't heard them on analog in a while, and I'm pretty sure I heard them on the Mansfield response channels the other day.
Yes, I am hearing them on Layer 2 of the FW Regional P25 system. Before the Kennedale talk groups went active, they were responding on Mansfiled Fire 6 (talkgroup 6169) but seem to be using their own now.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 04-24-2014, 4:41 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fort Worth Texas
Posts: 128
Default

have you submitted those to the DB yet Eric?
__________________
jasday
PRO 106-BC246T-BC996XT
Fort Worth Texas
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2014, 11:45 PM
Ensnared's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 2,044
Default FWPD Zero Tolerance

Tonight, I was traveling on IH35W from DFW airport & heard FWPD in the clear on TG5015, no encryption whatsoever. In fact, I was still listening to them around the 10 mile marker on this road. I won't reveal the content of the transmissions.
__________________
“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” Christopher Hitchens.
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2014, 10:50 AM
Ensnared's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 2,044
Default Denton LE

Will Denton LE be joining the FW Regional P25 TSYS? I see that there is a site in Denton.
__________________
“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.” Christopher Hitchens.

Last edited by Ensnared; 05-03-2014 at 11:26 AM.. Reason: revised question
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2014, 11:16 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Denton
Posts: 427
Default

Denton County will be joining once they get their contract with Motorola finalized so that they can purchase all of the upgraded repeaters for their sites. The city will join but not anytime soon.
__________________
Stephen
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2014, 11:22 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensnared View Post
Tonight, I was traveling on IH35W from DFW airport & heard FWPD in the clear on TG5015, no encryption whatsoever. In fact, I was still listening to them around the 10 mile marker on this road. I won't reveal the content of the transmissions.
Most FWPD talkgroups are encrypted but not all. The COPS/Code Blue (neighborhood watch groups), SSI (School Security Initiative) and Special Event talkgroups are not encrypted. The COPS talkgroups switched this past week and are now active on the P25 system.

TG5015 is listed as a Zero Tolerance talkgroup but may be a Special Event talkgroup since it was not encrypted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensnared View Post
I have questions. Will Tarrant County SO be joining the FW Regional P25 system? Will Denton SO and City be joining them as well?
Tarrant County SO has already switched and seem to be using even numbered talkgroups between 5834 and 5848 on Layer 2. Other Tarrant County services such as the Jail, Constables, etc have also switched.

I also believe, and this is partially confirmed by the new posting in the DB of the FWFD backup talkgroups, that everyone on Layers 1 and 2 have backup talkgroups on the opposite layer. If primary use is on Layer 2, the backup talkgroup on Layer 1 is -1 (eg, FWFD Ch/TG 5336 primarily on Layer 2, the backup is TG 5335 on Layer 1). The opposite is true for primary users on Layer 1. Their backup talkgroup on Layer 2 is +1 (eg, Westover Hills PD/TG 5799 primarily on Layer 1 should have TG 5800 on Layer 2 as their backup. This is not true in every case- exceptions include the Interop talkgroups.
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 1:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions