A crazy idea for a future scanner

[racin06]

How about this idea for future scanners. The ability to view the actual location of the person transmitting in longitude/latitude. In addition to displaying long/lat, the scanner would also have a color road map display to show the location of the person transmitting.

I'm sure Garmin and Uniden or Radio Shack could put their heads together and develop such a scanner.

What do you all think? Do you think I'm crazy?

 

[Dubbin]

Do you think I'm crazy?

Yup :lol:

 

[racin06]

Actually, I don't think developing such a scanner would be that difficult. You would just add the color display and the ability for maps to be uploaded to the scanner. The scanner would have a CF memory card for map storage just like some GPS receivers on the market. However, the scanner would not be a GPS receiver. The uploaded maps would have the long/lat data for any location. When a person transmits, the long/lat data is transmitted to the scanner, the scanner then matches the transmitted long/lat location with the map storage long/lat location and displays the location on the scanner.

Are there any trunking systems that incorporate GPS technology for the purpose of knowing where the person transmitting is located?

 

[jbstahr]

Are there any trunking systems that incorporate GPS technology for the purpose of knowing where the person transmitting is located?

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Medic/Operations/Communications.htm

Medic in Mecklenburg county has had this for a couple years now. As far as the public being able to track police/fire/ems transmission locations, don't count on it. It would never get FCC approval. Regardless of what the public wants, Officer Safety is paramount. Would you want someone with terrorist intentions knowing where the police are located at any given moment? I think not! :shock:

 

[racin06]

Are there any trunking systems that incorporate GPS technology for the purpose of knowing where the person transmitting is located?

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Medic/Operations/Communications.htm

Medic in Mecklenburg county has had this for a couple years now. As far as the public being able to track police/fire/ems transmission locations, don't count on it. It would never get FCC approval. Regardless of what the public wants, Officer Safety is paramount. Would you want someone with terrorist intentions knowing where the police are located at any given moment? I think not! :shock:

You definately have a good point on knowing where the police are located. That would not be a good thing. Oh well, just an idea.

 

[racin06]

Are there any trunking systems that incorporate GPS technology for the purpose of knowing where the person transmitting is located?

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Medic/Operations/Communications.htm

Medic in Mecklenburg county has had this for a couple years now. As far as the public being able to track police/fire/ems transmission locations, don't count on it. It would never get FCC approval. Regardless of what the public wants, Officer Safety is paramount. Would you want someone with terrorist intentions knowing where the police are located at any given moment? I think not! :shock:

You definately have a good point on knowing where the police are located. That would not be a good thing. Oh well, just an idea.

 

[Voyager]

How about this idea for future scanners. The ability to view the actual location of the person transmitting in longitude/latitude. In addition to displaying long/lat, the scanner would also have a color road map display to show the location of the person transmitting.

I'm sure Garmin and Uniden or Radio Shack could put their heads together and develop such a scanner.

What do you all think? Do you think I'm crazy?

Two problems. The first is described above. The second is technical. You would have to encode the location IN the transmissions. This means the transmitting station would have to have a GPS built into their radio. Some ham units already have this, I think, but not many (if any) commercial radios. Some mobiles do have inputs that could be used with an external GPS. The display is easy. The mpas are easy. It's getting the transmitting station to encode the data that is the hard part. What are the odds that this would happen? Not likely.

Now, how about a built in doppler unit that could tell you the DIRECTION (not the location) of the transmitter? That would be self-contained in the scanner, but the antennas would be a bit cumbersome (VHF array would be about 2 feet square). Not real practical for a handheld scanner. But, if you want something like that for your mobile, check out Agrello Engineering. You could install it in any mobile on any scanner, and it requires nothing on the part of the transmitting station.

Joe M.

 

[KB8UYC]

not to mention the fact that the scanner would priced VERY VERY HIGH!!! with a colored screen and all the goodies in it!

I dont mind a decent priced scanner but I dont want to have to pull a loan to by a scanner.........

 

[thumbtrap]

The ham guys do what they call "fox hunts" trying to locate the transmitter. It requires a directional antenna at the least, the better systems using TDOA (or phase) between two antennas. At best you'll only be able to get a bearing out of one location. You need a second person to get a bearing from another location.

In addition to all the stuff others have said about why it wouldn't happen, I'd just like to point out the above (it wouldn't even be practical given the use case for a scanner), and to boot - you'd probably find that when you listen to public saftey radio traffic especially - it probably is all coming from the repeater on top of a local building. You almost certainly aren't listening to the actual transmission from mobile and handheld radios.

 

[baybum]

Seems to me you would get the location of the repeater every time because that has a stronger signal than the hand-held.

Mike

 

[Heterodyne]

Seems to me you would get the location of the repeater every time because that has a stronger signal than the hand-held.e

And you have found the biggest flaw in the idea.

I'd surmise that a VAST majority of stuff people listen to on a scanner are repeatered transmissions.

For a 'pie in the sky' idea, not bad. For a serious suggestion on a future product, I suggest laying off the crack.

 

[shaft]

Would you want someone with terrorist intentions knowing where the police are located at any given moment? I think not! :shock:

Oh good point! Its a good thing we dont know where they are being dispatched to, or on scene or even give the exact address or phone numbers over the air!!

The terrorism excuse is quite old and should not be the answer for everything.

 

[rescuecomm]

Amatuer radio operators use APRS (automatic position reporting system?) with an external GPS conected to the radio to send their position to another station. Presently requires a notebook computer or such with the radio and GPS connected up.

Bob

 

[w0fg]

Amatuer radio operators use APRS (automatic position reporting system?) with an external GPS conected to the radio to send their position to another station. Presently requires a notebook computer or such with the radio and GPS connected up.

Bob

It doesn't require a computer to transmit the position; just a GPS and an interface like the Tiny Trak 3 http://www.byonics.com/tinytrak/
To receive and display the position it does require either a computer or a radio like the Kenwood TM-D700A that is able to decode the APRS data.

 

[N_Jay]

What it does require is to retrofit EVERY unit with a STANDARD type of GPS interface.

I have a great idea. Why don't we add a scanner tax that pays for every public safety system in the US to be upgraded to have AVL capability? (Sarcastic Humor, for those who might not recognise it)

 

[N_Jay]

Oh good point! Its a good thing we dont know where they are being dispatched to, or on scene or even give the exact address or phone numbers over the air!!

The terrorism excuse is quite old and should not be the answer for everything.

Replace the word Terrorist" with "criminal".

 

[shaft]

Replace the word Terrorist" with "criminal".

A much more fitting word...