Id say the problem is paranoid sheriffs and police chiefs....
ARMER Participation Plans
- Thread starter box23
- Start date
- Status
stmills
Member
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)
No the problem is a lack of knowledge in on which channel is secure and which is not. Last week a task force was conducting operations on LTac1 in the clear, the TF leader came on the air and adviced all units to halt any transmissions with names or vehicles as they were not secure. All units were advised to switch to
LESIU 1 or a Nextel group if they didn't have encryption. I have heard way too many tak forces operating on Ptacs and Ltacs giving out details as if they were on a secure channel, reminds me of listening to federal 3 letters before p25 came to town.
No the problem is a lack of knowledge in on which channel is secure and which is not. Last week a task force was conducting operations on LTac1 in the clear, the TF leader came on the air and adviced all units to halt any transmissions with names or vehicles as they were not secure. All units were advised to switch to
LESIU 1 or a Nextel group if they didn't have encryption. I have heard way too many tak forces operating on Ptacs and Ltacs giving out details as if they were on a secure channel, reminds me of listening to federal 3 letters before p25 came to town.
I guess its time to give up the scanning hobby for the good of the govt.
No one is suggesting that. In fact, there is a movement for policy to force all county mains clear. Most are voluntarily doing that now anyways. It’s the law tactical talkgroups that are sensitive, which is why I made my original comment that it was not fair to call crow wing jerks for not publishing the fleet map.
Unfortunately, every agency can not afford encryption upgrades so the result is the scenario stmills mentioned, and a desire to keep certain talkgroups private.
Unfortunately, every agency can not afford encryption upgrades so the result is the scenario stmills mentioned, and a desire to keep certain talkgroups private.
Not releasing tg names doesnt stop anyone from listening to anything...it only keeps us from having the official name of the group. Otter tail county seems to think that blacking out the locations of their towers will stop people from finding that info at the fcc site lol
Although in a deviously satisfying sorta way I enjoy the exchanges that have ensured after my little comment, my jerks comment was tongue in cheek.
I almost prefer the redacted data. I enjoy the mystery and hunt of trying to identify the talkgroups identity. It is the majority of my interest in this hobby since I spend 40 hours a week already listening to the radio. We have all done a great job of figuring out the data we have before participation plans came about...
I completely age with Nate on the encryption issue and mandatory clear strapping of Mains. There is a time and a place for it and it is a delicate balance that exists between government accountability and transparency and operational security and officer safety. There are things we don't need to hear. I also don't think it is unreasonable for people to suggest that talkgroups like west, east and statewide MRCC to use encryption when possible, but a blanket approach to encryption is definitely the wrong way to go...
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
I almost prefer the redacted data. I enjoy the mystery and hunt of trying to identify the talkgroups identity. It is the majority of my interest in this hobby since I spend 40 hours a week already listening to the radio. We have all done a great job of figuring out the data we have before participation plans came about...
I completely age with Nate on the encryption issue and mandatory clear strapping of Mains. There is a time and a place for it and it is a delicate balance that exists between government accountability and transparency and operational security and officer safety. There are things we don't need to hear. I also don't think it is unreasonable for people to suggest that talkgroups like west, east and statewide MRCC to use encryption when possible, but a blanket approach to encryption is definitely the wrong way to go...
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
That brings up an interesting point, does the database here list the names exactly as they are listed on official Motorola or other radios? For example, I know talkgroup 4300 as DK L MAIN 1, but in the RR database it lists DK PD 1. Is Dakota County one of the Redacted Counties or is there just an error?
Another one is talkgroup 2954. The RR shows MPLS PD 1 DI, but some Motorolas I have seen list it is MPPD 1 or something similar. I guess I am not sure why it is MPPD vs. simply MPD, but the point is the "official" name seems to differ from what RR shows. This is probably splitting hairs, but still sort of fun to note.
Last edited:
A lot of it is regional differences...
Law enforcement talkgroups have a different name every where you go...
LE
LEC
Law main
LE main
Blue
PD
PD main
PD admin
SO
So many different flavors...
In theory, if you want to truly give a talkgroup the state radio board official name, you have to add the county 2 character prefix and then the syntax that the local administrator has chosen. If you want it changed, just submit it to the database and they can change it for you...
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Law enforcement talkgroups have a different name every where you go...
LE
LEC
Law main
LE main
Blue
PD
PD main
PD admin
SO
So many different flavors...
In theory, if you want to truly give a talkgroup the state radio board official name, you have to add the county 2 character prefix and then the syntax that the local administrator has chosen. If you want it changed, just submit it to the database and they can change it for you...
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
We admins are supposed to make the tags as useful as possible...some of the official ones leave a lot to be desired in that respect....
http://www.co.otter-tail.mn.us/sheriff/armer/OtterTailARMERPlan.pdf
This is one for Otter Tail County.......
This is one for Otter Tail County.......
I may have some of them...ill have to look through them again....its a real mess how they get slapped together for meetings etc.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
