Maryland FIRST 700mhz TRS

[maus92]

Will be interesting to see what happens with Saint Mary's. I wonder if they decide to stay on their current system, will they get talkgroups on FiRST or just use MD-Tac's when they have radio issues.

I would also expect Talbot to have increased issues when Dorchester comes on since talkgroups will most likely be allowed to affiliate with Talbot. Probably in the future they will need to add even more frequencies unless they curtail QA, Caroline, & Dorchester talkgroup affiliations

IDK, but Primary User implies having their own TGs, while Interoperability Users access the Tac channels. We shall see I guess.

The southern portion of QAC is covered by Wye Mills tower site, so I don't see them denying QAC units from the Talbot Simulcast. That tower's location is what makes Talbot Simulcast so busy.

 

[boatbod]

I don't see how you can curtail affiliation from units operating within neighboring counties. Too much mutual aid to make that a realistic option.

 

[ThePhotoGuy]

I don't see how you can curtail affiliation from units operating within neighboring counties. Too much mutual aid to make that a realistic option.

I was thinking more DPW and other non public safety related talkgroups. I have seen different counties DPW's on other cell's many times. I have even seen Caroline DPW on the Anne Arundel Sites.

 

[wyesguy]

QA Co Law Dispatch

It appears that the normal amount of traffic is back on QA Law Dispatch, TG 11313, but it is now all garbled. Their Law 2 was already encrypted, but I guess they wanted to go full encryption. Users were told to "use Law 2 for the week", so perhaps users did need to get off of Law Dispatch to get their units "tweaked" to accommodate being encrypted on Law Dispatch. Adjacent departments, like MSP, Bay Bridge police and NRP were having problems with QA's Law Dispatch TG when QA issued multi-dept broadcasts earlier this week. Not sure how they got around the problem. Guess I now have some expensive paperweights...

 

[ThePhotoGuy]

It appears that the normal amount of traffic is back on QA Law Dispatch, TG 11313, but it is now all garbled. Their Law 2 was already encrypted, but I guess they wanted to go full encryption. Users were told to "use Law 2 for the week", so perhaps users did need to get off of Law Dispatch to get their units "tweaked" to accommodate being encrypted on Law Dispatch. Adjacent departments, like MSP, Bay Bridge police and NRP were having problems with QA's Law Dispatch TG when QA issued multi-dept broadcasts earlier this week. Not sure how they got around the problem. Guess I now have some expensive paperweights...

QA Law Dispatch does appear to be fully encrypted. Both Dispatchers and the Field Units are Encrypted this afternoon/evening.

I wonder what made them decide to encrypt now?

 

[maus92]

QA Law Dispatch does appear to be fully encrypted. Both Dispatchers and the Field Units are Encrypted this afternoon/evening.

I wonder what made them decide to encrypt now?

I can confirm after monitoring the cch from the Matapeake site late this morning. All traffic was encrypted. The First sysadmins wanted all user changes to happen prior to the system software upgrade scheduled for early January. Why a small department like QAC Sheriff decided they needed to encrypt is another issue. It's not like there are criminal gangs operating sophisticated operations in the county, or terrorists plotting mayhem. This is because modern encryption does not impose performance penalties, and is relatively easy to implement. What suffers is open government and citizen oversight over entities who have arrest power. The balancing factor *should* be easy and timely FOIA access to recordings , the recordings should not controlled by Sheriffs / police agencies who choose to encrypt., and the costs to retrieve those recordings should be the responsibility of the entity that chooses to encrypt them. This model / scheme satisfies the argument that encryption is for officer safety, yet maintains accountability.
.

 

[wyesguy]

Perhaps it's a bit off topic, but in this instance, they lose. Not quite a year ago I heard QA Law Dispatch put out a broadcast for a male/female couple running out of a store with stolen merchandise, after having attempted to use counterfeit bills. They were in a black Hyundai Elantra with temporary tags. In a shopping center several miles away I saw that vehicle with matching plates. I called to inform them of the location and waited/watched, in the event it moved. A male came out of a store with large items and loaded the trunk. While returning the shopping cart, a deputy finally arrived. As a supervisor also arrived, the female came out of the store with a bag of large items. I thought I saw the deputy notice her as she immediately turned left and ducked into a liquor store, so I assumed they had it all under control. Once I got home (due to poor reception in the car) I discovered that the male took off running across Rt 50. He outran the 2 deputies, and the female got away, as well. For the next several hours there was a manhunt, with sheriff deputies, MSP troopers, Bay Bridge police, and a MSP helicopter, in the Gibson Grant community. I seriously doubt they would have caught them (or at least not that quickly) if their TG was encrypted that day; their units were miles away. Oh well...

 

[boatbod]

I can confirm after monitoring the cch from the Matapeake site late this morning. All traffic was encrypted. The First sysadmins wanted all user changes to happen prior to the system software upgrade scheduled for early January. Why a small department like QAC Sheriff decided they needed to encrypt is another issue. It's not like there are criminal gangs operating sophisticated operations in the county, or terrorists plotting mayhem. This is because modern encryption does not impose performance penalties, and is relatively easy to implement. What suffers is open government and citizen oversight over entities who have arrest power. The balancing factor *should* be easy and timely FOIA access to recordings , the recordings should not controlled by Sheriffs / police agencies who choose to encrypt., and the costs to retrieve those recordings should be the responsibility of the entity that chooses to encrypt them. This model / scheme satisfies the argument that encryption is for officer safety, yet maintains accountability.
.

Talbot Law tac channels are encrypted too. For now dispatch is still in the clear.

 

[maus92]

Talbot Law tac channels are encrypted too. For now dispatch is still in the clear.

As are tac and other specialized channels on the AACo SmartZone system. There is a need for some encryption, but for routine day-to-day operations, a balance needs to be struck. Policing should not be done in secrecy.

 

[boatbod]

As are tac and other specialized channels on the AACo SmartZone system. There is a need for some encryption, but for routine day-to-day operations, a balance needs to be struck. Policing should not be done in secrecy.

I agree, but I'm not sure the law enforcement community is necessarily on the same page.

 

[de784]

Encrypting

Delaware state police are set to encrypt all dispatch early 2019

 

[maus92]

I agree, but I'm not sure the law enforcement community is necessarily on the same page.

I know they are not. LEOs were also against citizens recording their actions in the performance of their duties - but the courts ultimately decided that issue. The more metropolitan counties that have elected county executives (that hire their police chiefs) are not as likely to allow department to go completely encrypted. The counties that have elected Sheriffs that are in charge of primary law enforcement seem to be the departments that favor encryption. They do not really have a check on their authority other than the courts (and existentially the voters,) but I suppose the county commissioners could refuse to fund encryption if they saw it not in the interest of the citizens.

There might be a technological solution. There could be a system of delayed archiving of radio traffic by a certain amount of time, accessible by internet . It could either be real time stream or compressed to remove dead air. Sensitive transmissions could be held back. This would satisfy both concerns about criminals monitoring radio traffic to avoid arrest, and the citizens right to know what there public officers are doing, and what is going on in their neighborhoods. Still fleshing out the idea.

 

[ThePhotoGuy]

At least with the Queen Anne's Situation. All priority calls go out on MSP S Centreville Talkgroup and often on MDTA Bay Bridge Talkgroup so at least you can sort of know what is going on.

 

[ThePhotoGuy]

12465 is Dorchester Detention Center. Not sure if on full time or just testing.

 

[boatbod]

I heard from a LEO friend that Talbot may soon follow the rush to fully encrypt. I gather the change in QA has had some unintended consequences that are causing operational challenges, such as allied agencies (non-QA) who would normally monitor dispatch channels for traffic incidents but can no longer do so.

 

[ThePhotoGuy]

I heard from a LEO friend that Talbot may soon follow the rush to fully encrypt.

Will be interesting to see what the ripple effects are on the surrounding systems - Talbot, Caroline, Kent, and Dorchester. Kent primarily uses their dispatch channel and sometimes you will here units be asked to switch to "Law 3" which is encrypted. I have noticed two talkgroups 12827 and 12830 which are fully encrypted and has become active at times in the past couple months for Kent.

The database/forum is sparse with information on Caroline so I am not sure of their encryption practices. Often you see Caroline Law active on AA Site so that is only when I listen to them.

Based on testing earlier this summer for the future Dorchester Talkgroups. There are about 66 talkgroups with 15 being encrypted at the time. Things could have changed and still could before they switchover.

---
Edit:

Are all of Talbot Law Tac's now encrypted? Just curious so we can update the database. What about Easton Police's?

 

[boatbod]

Based on testing earlier this summer for the future Dorchester Talkgroups. There are about 66 talkgroups with 15 being encrypted at the time. Things could have changed and still could before they switchover.

---
Edit:

Are all of Talbot Law Tac's now encrypted? Just curious so we can update the database. What about Easton Police's?

I believe all Talbot Law TAC are now encrypted, but they don't get a lot of use so it's hard to say for sure. Talbot Law Dispatch is presently in the clear, as is Caroline Law Dispatch.

 

[maus92]

I heard from a LEO friend that Talbot may soon follow the rush to fully encrypt. I gather the change in QA has had some unintended consequences that are causing operational challenges, such as allied agencies (non-QA) who would normally monitor dispatch channels for traffic incidents but can no longer do so.

I would imagine new programming / keys would need to be pushed to outside agencies radios as well - a bit of a logistical challenge. Sorta like what happened when DCFD decided to encrypted their primary channels (to prevent embarrassing incidents from becoming too public.) They later had to rescind the decision because all the surrounding mutual aid jurisdictions had to add / change their keys (in literally thousands of operational and cache radios) - and there was insufficient prior notice given by the DCFD (plus political backlash.)

 

[DIGITALCLUELESS]

As much as the Agencies depend on good publicity from the media, I find it surprising they would encrypt and prevent/delay coverage of breaking news events.

 

[ResQguy]

I would imagine new programming / keys would need to be pushed to outside agencies radios as well - a bit of a logistical challenge. Sorta like what happened when DCFD decided to encrypted their primary channels (to prevent embarrassing incidents from becoming too public.) They later had to rescind the decision because all the surrounding mutual aid jurisdictions had to add / change their keys (in literally thousands of operational and cache radios) - and there was insufficient prior notice given by the DCFD (plus political backlash.)

You skipped an important point or two there. The change was made without the consent of the incoming mayor and 99% of the FD command staff. It was changed as soon as technically possible after the new leadership was sworn in.