captaincraig44
Member
Was this known in advance? I was completely taken by surprise with this move this morning. At least we still have fire in the clear - subject to change, of course.
Arvada PD gone dark
- Thread starter captaincraig44
- Start date
- Status
rckydenver
Member
Well this s*cks. Not sure what to listen to now. Wondering why they went dark? I saw on the MNN page that they went Phase 2 but ENC.
Yep, they cut over at 10 am (Steve was monitoring when they announced their last all-call before switching) to not only encrypted but even if it was in the clear, they went to Phase-II, which most scanners cannot receive the voice traffic from that waveform.
I don't think fire will go encrypted though because Arvada Fire Protection District is a completely separate government agency from the City of Arvada. They have a larger coverage area than just Arvada and also some of Wheat Ridge and Jefferson county.
And Arvada fire has two 536HPs for their online feed so even if they had to go to Phase-II then that would be fine.
I don't think fire will go encrypted though because Arvada Fire Protection District is a completely separate government agency from the City of Arvada. They have a larger coverage area than just Arvada and also some of Wheat Ridge and Jefferson county.
And Arvada fire has two 536HPs for their online feed so even if they had to go to Phase-II then that would be fine.
Last edited:
captaincraig44
Member
I think the scanning hobby is dying a slow death, especially in the Denver metro area and the state of Colorado in general. It's kind of ironic that Arvada prided itself on transparency on its website with city matters, yet here we are with PD comms now encrypted. In all honesty, if I didn't travel as much as I do, I don't think I'd have much use for the 436 anymore.
rckydenver
Member
Using the PRO96Com program on Arvada.
rckydenver
Member
TG 38048 and 38049 showing ENC.
captaincraig44
Member
Yep. Heard nothing in the clear on either of those TGs since I turned it on after getting the MNN notification.
Right when they made the switch, dispatch patched all the Arvada PD talkgroups together and asked units to do a roll call on ch-1. I watched pro96com when this happened and 38048 popped up with all sorts of Phase-2 ENC traffic. Here is how I believe the new "Darkvada" channel lineup looks:
38048 - Arvada PD Ch-1 (Phase-2 / ENC)
38049 - Arvada PD Ch-2 (Phase-2 / ENC)
38050 - Old Arvada PD Ch-1 (Phase-1 / Clear)
38051 - Old Arvada PD Ch-2 (Phase-1 / Clear)
38053 - Still Arvada PD Ch-3 (now ENC and mixed Phase-1 / Phase-2)
(still need to confirm other Arvada PD groups, but I would keep the old ones in the DB until we can figure out if they will still be used)
Arvada Fire TGs are still in the clear but I have noticed a mix of Phase-1 / Phase-2 traffic today.
I'll go through all my logs later this evening and see what else changed.
38048 - Arvada PD Ch-1 (Phase-2 / ENC)
38049 - Arvada PD Ch-2 (Phase-2 / ENC)
38050 - Old Arvada PD Ch-1 (Phase-1 / Clear)
38051 - Old Arvada PD Ch-2 (Phase-1 / Clear)
38053 - Still Arvada PD Ch-3 (now ENC and mixed Phase-1 / Phase-2)
(still need to confirm other Arvada PD groups, but I would keep the old ones in the DB until we can figure out if they will still be used)
Arvada Fire TGs are still in the clear but I have noticed a mix of Phase-1 / Phase-2 traffic today.
I'll go through all my logs later this evening and see what else changed.
captaincraig44
Member
Should we start a pot as to which metro area agency turns on encryption next? It's a sad trend that seems to be accelerating.
scanlist
Scanning since the 70's to today.
Not necessarily the "E" word though my post last Thursday about Denver PS taking the simulcast system down and switching over to the Mt Morrison site (which appears no one seemed to care) did render scanners with EDACS ESK tracking useless the time the Mt Morrison site was on the air.
It's possible this could have been a test with a different "key" vs the standard 00A that is hard coded into scanner firmware. Hopefully this is only the case when they use the Mt Morrison site otherwise it's possible that Denver could make scanning the PS system unpossible.
It's possible this could have been a test with a different "key" vs the standard 00A that is hard coded into scanner firmware. Hopefully this is only the case when they use the Mt Morrison site otherwise it's possible that Denver could make scanning the PS system unpossible.
I suspect that anyone who works for an agency about to go encrypted would be forbidden to discuss any details until after the fact, if they wanted to keep their job. Obviously it would be wonderful to know who might be "planning" to go encrypted in the future, but I presume that anyone in position to know about such matters would not be authorized to discuss them. It really sucks.
All police agencies would presumably assert that the decision of whether to go encrypted is solely an internal agency matter which doesn't affect the public (at least as far the State Administrative Procedure Act is concerned), and that no one outside the agency should be allowed/invited to comment upon, or otherwise review, such decision/action before it is made. I suspect that if anyone challenged such a matter under (for example) a State's Administrative Procedure Act on the theory that notice and comment was required, any court in the land would find such a decision to be solely "internal", equivalent to the brand of napkins an agency buys, and that no member of the public has any right to object to, or otherwise challenge, such a decision before it is made. Indeed, the court's would probably also rule that a private litigant doesn't even has standing to bring such a case, because the agency took no action that actually or potentially had a direct (i.e. personal) affect upon them.
If a city council or county commission was unhappy about a decision to go encrypted, they could probably force the agency to reverse the decision if they really wanted to make an issue about it. However, I've never heard of any local or state legislative body critically examining an agency's decision to go encrypted, in any Jurisdiction in America. And given that the specific act of implementing encryption probably costs very little (if anything), it would probably be hard to convince any local or state legislative body that this issue was worth getting concerned about.
I suspect that many agencies don't even notify/inform their elected officials responsible for the agency's budget about going encrypted (assuming any officials even care about such a decision, and/or understand what encryption is...)
All police agencies would presumably assert that the decision of whether to go encrypted is solely an internal agency matter which doesn't affect the public (at least as far the State Administrative Procedure Act is concerned), and that no one outside the agency should be allowed/invited to comment upon, or otherwise review, such decision/action before it is made. I suspect that if anyone challenged such a matter under (for example) a State's Administrative Procedure Act on the theory that notice and comment was required, any court in the land would find such a decision to be solely "internal", equivalent to the brand of napkins an agency buys, and that no member of the public has any right to object to, or otherwise challenge, such a decision before it is made. Indeed, the court's would probably also rule that a private litigant doesn't even has standing to bring such a case, because the agency took no action that actually or potentially had a direct (i.e. personal) affect upon them.
If a city council or county commission was unhappy about a decision to go encrypted, they could probably force the agency to reverse the decision if they really wanted to make an issue about it. However, I've never heard of any local or state legislative body critically examining an agency's decision to go encrypted, in any Jurisdiction in America. And given that the specific act of implementing encryption probably costs very little (if anything), it would probably be hard to convince any local or state legislative body that this issue was worth getting concerned about.
I suspect that many agencies don't even notify/inform their elected officials responsible for the agency's budget about going encrypted (assuming any officials even care about such a decision, and/or understand what encryption is...)
Last edited:
Denver would have to re-program their existing radios for this to happen wouldn't they? I haven't heard anything regarding this however the end user is always the last to know.
Also I just have another random thought on the subject: If YOU worked at an agency going encrypted, would you even think about posting an explanation on RR, or in any other public forum? The only possible outcome of such an action would be nasty Emails, hate mail, angry phone calls, people calling your supervisors asking for you to be fired, etc. Presumably that's why no agency ever submits this type of decision to a notice-and-comment process...
captaincraig44
Member
Have there been instances of individuals using scanner comms (online or in hand) to elude law enforcement recently, or is this encryption trend just a "we're going to do it because we can" mentality? Do these agencies assume that everyone with a scanner is a terrorist these days?
I've had two instances personally where after listening to PD comms I've been able to help law enforcement apprehend criminals. I guess the deviant use of the scanners outweigh such positive experiences this day in age.
I've had two instances personally where after listening to PD comms I've been able to help law enforcement apprehend criminals. I guess the deviant use of the scanners outweigh such positive experiences this day in age.
Kevin_N
Member
What's really crazy about this CRAP is that they don't need to do it to all channels. Why not just the channels where it's justified?
You might think with all the bad press about people not trusting police, agencies would leave Dispatch in the open. It would be a chance to show that they do a good job.
Instead they take the approach to hide everything. Makes them much less trust worthy.
Then there's the media piece. They must be programming radios for the media or there would be articles and stories about the media not knowing what's going on. A nice little conspiracy between the agencies and the media to shut out the citizens that they are supposed to protect and who pay their salaries.
Evil scanner listeners must be stopped. And just trust us. You don't need to know what we're doing or what danger might be out there. We will handle it all with no oversight.
Anyone remember reading about DPD many many years ago having a burglary ring in the department? Not saying that kind of thing will happen, but the point is no one can know what's going on.
Pretty sickening.
You might think with all the bad press about people not trusting police, agencies would leave Dispatch in the open. It would be a chance to show that they do a good job.
Instead they take the approach to hide everything. Makes them much less trust worthy.
Then there's the media piece. They must be programming radios for the media or there would be articles and stories about the media not knowing what's going on. A nice little conspiracy between the agencies and the media to shut out the citizens that they are supposed to protect and who pay their salaries.
Evil scanner listeners must be stopped. And just trust us. You don't need to know what we're doing or what danger might be out there. We will handle it all with no oversight.
Anyone remember reading about DPD many many years ago having a burglary ring in the department? Not saying that kind of thing will happen, but the point is no one can know what's going on.
Pretty sickening.
Agree with all your above post, don't forget that all of the MARC members will have, (if not already do have) all of the sites networked, (Probably also Aurora) and since the Harris equipment is so versatile and upgradable there is no reason to be surprised if the switch to all flavors of P25 from EDACS could not be done incrementally or in even bigger bites. In the long run, the EDACS will not be around, but it still can be a part of the big switcheroo as it unfolds.
If there is such a thing as Broadcastify stock, better sell it now
I seriously doubt this is happening with encrypted talkgroups. If it is/was, ANYONE with a home-made press badge and a blog could contact the agency and demand the same access, and sue in Federal Court if they don't get it based on the First Amendment. And, they would likely have a good case. Of course, the judge could only afford relief of "equal" access, which could be 100% or 0% depending on the agency's course of action.
If this is happening, it would have to be a very, very, very well kept secret...
Kevin_N
Member
Well if it's not let's see some bad press from the media. Come on media, it affects your livelihood!
Kevin_N
Member
Also, you shouldn't be that surprised. Remember the newspaper in Fort Collins got a radio programmed by FCPD. Maybe some other news outlets do need to sue.
- Status
