• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Greene County Simulcast system - Observations

Status
Not open for further replies.

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Been monitoring the relatively new Greene County Simulcast system which is linked to/part of the larger Ohio MARCS-IP system and have some observations I'd like to share:

To this point, the control channel has stayed consistently on 858.8875. I've seen 3 primary frequencies that are being used for the Voice signals: 851.9625, 852.4125, 852.7875. Did also log 852.4625 a couple of weeks back. All of these frequencies are included in FCC application (#5939254) for the various towers that are part of the system. When I scanned all the frequencies in the application, I also found Voice activity on 853.35, but I'm pretty sure that frequency is not being used as part of the Greene Co Simulcast system at this time. It appears it is still being used on the older Ohio MARCS system from its Wilberforce site.

The Beavercreek and Fairborn Fire and Police dispatch have migrated over to the new Greene Co Simulcast system (TGRPs have been added to RRDB). Am hearing radio test calls almost every day as other departments appear to be preparing to migrate to the new system.

I've also noticed that when I'm at home, I only see the Beavercreek & Fairborn Fire/Police TGRPs on the 800MHz Greene Co Simulcast, and I don't see those talk groups on the 700MHz Ohio MARPS-IP from the Wilberforce site. However, when I was mobile in Montgomery Co yesterday, I was seeing/hearing the Beavercreek/Fairborn TGRPs from the Dayton site of the Ohio MARCS-IP 700MHz system.

Hope these observations are useful as we monitor the growth of the Ohio MARCS-IP and Greene Co Simulcast system.
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Lead Database Admin
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
4,297
Location
Ohio
I've also noticed that when I'm at home, I only see the Beavercreek & Fairborn Fire/Police TGRPs on the 800MHz Greene Co Simulcast, and I don't see those talk groups on the 700MHz Ohio MARPS-IP from the Wilberforce site. However, when I was mobile in Montgomery Co yesterday, I was seeing/hearing the Beavercreek/Fairborn TGRPs from the Dayton site of the Ohio MARCS-IP 700MHz system.
One of two things are possible regarding the Wilberforce site...

1) It will be converted and integrated with the Greene County simulcast cell (including the frequencies) once that's fully up and running, or

2) It will remain in service as-is but reserved for OSP and other MARCS-IP users only.

I personally suspect option 1, which is what's happening in Warren County.

One of the beauties of this system (and others like it) is that specific talk groups and radios can be restricted to certain sites; as such, some talk groups would never be seen outside their primary area of operation.
 

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
...

One of the beauties of this system (and others like it) is that specific talk groups and radios can be restricted to certain sites; as such, some talk groups would never be seen outside their primary area of operation.
What I found interesting was that the Beavercreek/Fairborn TGRPs were only broadcast on the 800MHz Simulcast System and not the main 700MHz site in Greene County (Wilberforce). But they where broadcast on the 700MHz site in Montgomery County. This makes sense as there may be Beavercreek/Fairborn units that travel in to Montgomery County (e.g., Medics going to hospitals) that may get out of range of the Greene Co Simulcast sites so they can still communicate through the wider 700MHz Ohio MARCS-IP system.

Be curious to know if the the Beavercreek/Fairborn TGRPs are heard on the Springfield 700MHz site? I have been limited in my mobile scanning recon after a recent knee surgery.

Have started to hear regular activity today on a new TGRP, 20164, on the Greene Co Simulcast. It's some type of law enforcement, but I haven't been able to identify the specific department yet.

Will continue to monitor.
 

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
The Beavercreek/Fairborn PD/FD activity appears to be fairly normal.

I have noticed a lot of testing traffic among several talk groups. Its going to start getting real busy soon. Right now they are only using 3 channels for voice, I suspect they will add one or two channels as more agencies switch to full time use.

Have successfully set up UniTrunker with my HomePatrol-1E providing the discriminator tap. As I'm learning my way around UniTrunker it really increases my insight into how this (and other trunking) system works.

The Multi-Path problem is real. I found when I was doing mobile scanning earlier today (with an external mobile antenna) it was generally less of an issue. Much better signal, and generally one signal was significantly more prominent. At home, I'm finding it more of a problem. May eventually need to employ a directional antenna to get more consistent performance.
 

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Several more agencies appear to going live on the new Greene Co Simulcast system today. Am seeing regular voice traffic on another frequency, 852.6425, making at least 4 frequencies in regular use (+ the CC).
 

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Ted

do we add the new freqs to the listing? or just add the TG?
No, you only need the Control Channel frequency with a P25 system, the other frequencies are automatically computed by most trunking scanners from predefined tables. I believe RR likes to include the voices channels in the list of frequencies for completeness.

Most all the TGRPs I'm seeing were added in the last major add to the RRDB for the Ohio MARCS-IP.
 

jasonk

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
231
Location
Dayton, OH
Beavercreek FD - No Tones at all VHF or MARCS (Station Alerting over IP)
Fairborn - Still hearing tones on VHF
Xenia Fire - Tones over MARCS-IP only
Xenia Twp - Tones over Greene Fire VHF (Will switch to county wide Dispatch Channel January 1)
All Greene Fire East Agencies - Tones over Greene Fire VHF (Will switch to county wide Dispatch Channel January 1)

Sugarcreek / Bellbrook - Tones on VHF and GFWDISP on Marcs IP

Thats the current line up ...
 

wrc1045A

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
64
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Jasonk


When you tone does that mean regular audio also? I just talked to an FPD buddy that said they are supposed to get more repeaters in Greene County. They hate the marbles in the mouth audio they get regularly. I am not hearing all the audio from the calls but today I hear constant traffic. Almost something every minute or two from Greene County. I will probably grab another scanner just to monitor the Marcs IP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

wa8pyr

Technischer Guru
Lead Database Admin
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
4,297
Location
Ohio
Beavercreek FD - No Tones at all VHF or MARCS (Station Alerting over IP)
Fairborn - Still hearing tones on VHF
Xenia Fire - Tones over MARCS-IP only
Xenia Twp - Tones over Greene Fire VHF (Will switch to county wide Dispatch Channel January 1)
All Greene Fire East Agencies - Tones over Greene Fire VHF (Will switch to county wide Dispatch Channel January 1)

Sugarcreek / Bellbrook - Tones on VHF and GFWDISP on Marcs IP
So Sugarcreek / Bellbrook is dispatched on GFW DISP? Would that be talk group 20122?
 

wrc1045A

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
64
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Beavercreek is open, no encryption. Are you hearing garbled noises? (somtimes it comes in fine and sometimes it comes in all garbled?). I might start another thread but I talked to a guy at P&R and he said to only program the closest tower if you are using an omni directional antennae. He said that if you program more than one tower with the multicast then you may have audio issues. I pgrogrammed the closest tower at WS and I no longer have any issues.

Currently I hear Yellowsprings, Fairborn, County, and Beavercreek PD and Fire without any issues now! Audio does sounds garbled as my PD buddy stated, not sure why it is but Fairborn did roll out about a month ago.

My other question is that I am picking up a few more scanners. On the Pro-2096 do I have to program all the TG in there?
I also have made a few changes - I was given a directional antennae. I mounted and pointed it at the WS repeater and now it works perfect. Thing is is the scanner is only meant for the Marcs-IP monitoring :(
 
Last edited:

TedRHayes

Member
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
253
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Beavercreek is open, no encryption. Are you hearing garbled noises? (somtimes it comes in fine and sometimes it comes in all garbled?). I might start another thread but I talked to a guy at P&R and he said to only program the closest tower if you are using an omni directional antennae. He said that if you program more than one tower with the multicast then you may have audio issues. I pgrogrammed the closest tower at WS and I no longer have any issues.

Currently I hear Yellowsprings, Fairborn, County, and Beavercreek PD and Fire without any issues now! Audio does sounds garbled as my PD buddy stated, not sure why it is but Fairborn did roll out about a month ago.

My other question is that I am picking up a few more scanners. On the Pro-2096 do I have to program all the TG in there?
I also have made a few changes - I was given a directional antennae. I mounted and pointed it at the WS repeater and now it works perfect. Thing is is the scanner is only meant for the Marcs-IP monitoring :(
The Beavercreek Police Dispatch is in the clear. I heard (on 20133) an officer ask another officer to switch to the OPS channel, that's when I immediately saw 20136 go active but it was encrypted. It is my assumption that 20136 is the TGRP id for Bevearcreek Police OPS channel.

The problem with "programming the closest tower" is all the tower sites in the Greene County Simulcast system use the same frequencies! Thus the multi-path issue.

What is the directional antenna you are using?

Thanks,
 

wrc1045A

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
64
Location
Beavercreek, Ohio
Not sure what antennae. I was given the antennae by the ones whom setup the system. I will have to ask Monday. Also the Pro 2096 sounds by farther best out of my scanners

I did go on a scanner frenzy

I got two pro-2096, 996, 396, pro-96, pro-106 and a psr-800. I already had a pro-34 and pro-95


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

jasonk

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
231
Location
Dayton, OH
Okay - I started an Online Feed for the Greene Simulcast System .....this is operating off a Pro 197 in my basement - with Stock Metal Antenna. I cannot even get a hit on the 996xt ......

So listen in and give me any feedback - its currently in open mode .....so it will search all Traffic.

And yes - most PD OPS Channels are encrypted ..... All Dispatch will remain in the clear for now.

Thanks

Jason
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top