• 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

ProVoice or What ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

jeffbrowning

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
18
Location
Cedar Hill, Tx
The south Dallas County cities of DeSoto and Cedar Hill, Tx are switching to a trunk system in May 2008, an officer I know raves about not being heard on scanners (what does he know?) does anyone have a clue what system is going in or how cant I find out if it has ProVoice before I buy a digital trunk scanner, had the Grecom PSR 500 in mind.
 

ka3jjz

Wiki Admin Emeritus
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Messages
21,780
Location
Bowie, Md.
However you still might be able to sniff out the details of the system by using a software decoder; and I think - I'm not entirely sure, so someone would have to jump in here that knows - that due to the fact that MPT uses a low speed control channel, a discriminator tap to get the signal is not necessary...

We have several such decoders (including UniTrunker...) listed here...

http://wiki.radioreference.com/index.php/Trunked_Radio_Decoders

73 Mike
 

Blaine

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
91
Location
Plano, Texas
Russell said:
And, as I recall the voice is still analog.
FWIW - If it is indeed going to be MPT-1327 (and analog)
like Decatur, Tx. PD, it might be pretty easy to follow the
system by just putting the frequencies used by the system
in your scanner, and just locking out the control channel.

I listen every once and a while to the Decatur system, which
comes in quite well here in Flower Mound, and the above
method seems to work OK for me. However, it is a very "light" traffic
system, with only PD on there right now, as far as I know.

If Southwest Regional Comm is to be the same, as in -
JUST FD/PD/EMS, then "perhaps" it might be relatively
easy to follow along with the voice traffic. I can't imagine
that area of the metro being THAT busy, but maybe I'm
off base.

All I know is that so many said Careflite could not be monitored
when they went to the Passport system. That was obviously
proven wrong. I hear all tone outs and everything, just by simply
listening to the "home" channel frequencies.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
6,126
Location
Dallas, TX
Now hearing what may be an MPT-1327 type control channel on 453.3625, one of the frequencies licensed to SWRCC for their new system. It was not present earler in the week (Monday), or last week. I did not check yesterday.
 

mbstone99

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,261
Location
Hamilton, Ontario
Swrcc

hiegtx said:
Now hearing what may be an MPT-1327 type control channel on 453.3625, one of the frequencies licensed to SWRCC for their new system. It was not present earler in the week (Monday), or last week. I did not check yesterday.
Yesterday I was hearing a MPT1327 control channel on 453.3625, Desoto and this afternoon I was hearing the control channel on the 460.0375, Cedar Hill tower. I did some decoding of the Cedar Hill control channel but there wasn't any traffic yet.

19:00:42 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:01:17 - CCSC | Control Channel System Codeword| SYS Id: 0D99
19:01:21 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:02:55 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:02:56 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:03:30 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:04:12 - CCSC | Control Channel System Codeword| SYS Id: 0D99
19:04:29 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:05:00 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:05:46 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:05:46 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:06:10 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:06:42 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:07:09 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 5
19:07:42 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:08:34 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:08:43 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:08:46 - ALH | General single codeword | (000) Id: 0 Wt: 6 Rsvd: 0 M: 0 N: 0
19:09:05 - CCSC | Control Channel System Codeword| SYS Id: 0D99

Matt
 

mbstone99

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,261
Location
Hamilton, Ontario
Swrcc

I am hearing another control channel other then 453.3625/453.3875 for Desoto and 460.0375 for Cedar Hill. This one is on 453.6625 and is reporting a system ID of 0D89, maybe Duncanville?

Matt
 

andrewccm

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
284
Location
Dallas/Fort Worth
Lucky there is so much more in this area to monitor if that is indeed the case. As far as digital, I am enjoying listening to Grand Prairie and Mansfield...
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
6,126
Location
Dallas, TX
mbstone99 said:
I am hearing another control channel other then 453.3625/453.3875 for Desoto and 460.0375 for Cedar Hill. This one is on 453.6625 and is reporting a system ID of 0D89, maybe Duncanville?

Matt
Could be, Matt.

That frequency is licensed to Duncanville, with a land mobile trunked coding, under call sign WQHI705.
 

mbstone99

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,261
Location
Hamilton, Ontario
hiegtx said:
Could be, Matt.

That frequency is licensed to Duncanville, with a land mobile trunked coding, under call sign WQHI705.
I was just about to say it is most likely Duncanville. I did a check and they are licensed on that frequency.

Matt
 

Russell

Texas DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
1,507
Location
Dallas (and Austin) Texas
So should a third site be added for Duncanville with the five freqs listed under that license? Are these sites part of a networked system or are they three seperate and distinct systems? Seems like overkill to have 15 freqs with 3 control channels over a relatively small area. But, then again, I am not up to snuff on MPT-1327 systems.

Russell
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
6,126
Location
Dallas, TX
Russell said:
So should a third site be added for Duncanville with the five freqs listed under that license? Are these sites part of a networked system or are they three seperate and distinct systems? Seems like overkill to have 15 freqs with 3 control channels over a relatively small area. But, then again, I am not up to snuff on MPT-1327 systems.

Russell
Russell,
The Cedar Hill & Desoto sites are both licensed to SWRCC, the shared dispatch entity created by Cedar Hill, Desoto, & Duncanville several years ago. The Duncanville site, on the other hand, is specifically licensed to the City of Duncanville, not to SWRCC.

All three sites, the two licenses to SWRCC in Cedar Hill & Desoto, as well as Duncanville's, list the same control point in their FCC data: SWRCC's address in Desoto. And, all three list the same "contact", PROS LTD.

Knowing the territory, I'd suspect that Duncanville was not satisfied with signal coverage, particularly in the northern half of their city. They may have insisted on a third site, taking out their own license to make sure it happened. The other, less likely possibility, is that they decided to set up their own unique, but interoperable, system. That's unlikely, since SWRCC is listed as the control point.

Once the system is is far enough along in testing, or operational, we should be able to see if it's being operated as a three site system, or as two separate ones.
 

mbstone99

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,261
Location
Hamilton, Ontario
Russell said:
So should a third site be added for Duncanville with the five freqs listed under that license? Are these sites part of a networked system or are they three seperate and distinct systems? Seems like overkill to have 15 freqs with 3 control channels over a relatively small area. But, then again, I am not up to snuff on MPT-1327 systems.

Russell
I think that those 5 frequencies licensed will be part of the Duncanville site. I was getting a control channel last night on 453.4875 which is licensed to Duncanville. It seems the other sites are flipping the control channels around as well. I was getting Desoto 453.5125 (I have heard them previously on 453.3625 & 453.3875) and Cedar Hill on 460.1625 (I have heard them previously on 460.0375)

Matt
 

SCPD

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
Russell said:
So should a third site be added for Duncanville with the five freqs listed under that license? Are these sites part of a networked system or are they three seperate and distinct systems? Seems like overkill to have 15 freqs with 3 control channels over a relatively small area. But, then again, I am not up to snuff on MPT-1327 systems.

Russell
If you only knew ......
 

citylink_uk

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
254
I've been part of a team installing many of these MPT1327 systems (mainly by Fylde Micro - who link across to this very site) and they are very good and reliable if setup correctly.

The latest developments such as high speed data, repeater muting between overs, CTCSS overlay and various call setup alterations mean its a very feature rich protocol which is very affordable.

You definately can't just switch them on and go, and to get the best out of the system you have to fine tune all the perameters.

We use a free program called Trunkview, it's easy to install and is dedicated to monitoring/decoding MPT1327. Search for it on Google and feel free to PM me if you need help with it.
 

af5rn

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
1,059
Location
N. Tex / S. Fla
As much as I am not looking forward to this change, I have to admit that anything would be better than what they have. It sounds like crap. It takes a full minute to tone out a fire because of the redundant tone system they are using. And the amount of noise on that system is horrendous.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
6,126
Location
Dallas, TX
As much as I am not looking forward to this change, I have to admit that anything would be better than what they have. It sounds like crap. It takes a full minute to tone out a fire because of the redundant tone system they are using. And the amount of noise on that system is horrendous.
You're right. If they ever have a really big fire, it will have quite a head start before the dispatch system (at least the voice part), can ever get it toned out to the stations. Especially when they scattershoot companies between the three departments fairly often for responses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top