Probably to qualify for P25 grant money.
Bell County
- Thread starter Wes
- Start date
- Status
Probably to qualify for P25 grant money.
I am listening to EDACS PV on a daily basis, surveillance, TAC units, establishing PC. In my recent monitor, I found them talking about following suspect vehicles using mounted cameras. An inside source told me that Temple has hidden cameras in the park. Now, I have proof that they are using cameras to follow and establish PC. At present, I am down for the count. I am returning to Bell County on Wednesday. I might add, I am enjoying monitoring all these new talk groups. I have two days of recorded transmissions to review to further isolate talk groups. I have two solid positives, Temple Dispatch and Temple PD TAC 1. Why do I say this? They identified such as said channels. I will share these after I have reviewed the recordings. I am now in recovery, sorry.
What would help matters would be a listing of the officer numbering system for Bell County, Temple, etc. Then, it would be much easier to identify these. If you happen to know, please share.
What would help matters would be a listing of the officer numbering system for Bell County, Temple, etc. Then, it would be much easier to identify these. If you happen to know, please share.
Last edited:
Dead AC/CC
I don't know what happened to the former 700 MHz Bell County P25 listing in the RR DB.
I put the new 700 frequencies listed on the emerging Bell P25 system into my trusty PSR 500, as conventional, and heard nothing consistent with a control or alternate channel using a mobile antenna. I received a short burst of some noise which did not sound like any CC or AC I have ever heard.
I am also seeing two different call signs listed for the new Bell P25 system, one for Belton.
I don't know what happened to the former 700 MHz Bell County P25 listing in the RR DB.
I put the new 700 frequencies listed on the emerging Bell P25 system into my trusty PSR 500, as conventional, and heard nothing consistent with a control or alternate channel using a mobile antenna. I received a short burst of some noise which did not sound like any CC or AC I have ever heard.
I am also seeing two different call signs listed for the new Bell P25 system, one for Belton.
Last edited:
motorola_otaku
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 691
- Reaction score
- 28
That to me would indicate a simulcast system... but what do I know? *shrug*
Project25_MASTR
TX-COMU
Harris has more than just simulcast you mean?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Monkey Scratching Head
I am rather confused myself. At present, I am completely ignoring the aforementioned dead AC/CC 700 mhz frequencies listed since I am monitoring the system at Morgan's point, near Belton and hearing tons of talk groups that I'm having trouble following. I listened to hours of these recordings during the family Thanksgiving boredom. I am listening for agency identification, talk group name, etc. I am assuming that Bell County transmissions involving the word "center" makes reference to Bell County LE.
Also, I need to sit down and understand what the tip I received regarding the numbering of the systems from EDACS transferring to Harris P25. There was something about adding digits to the old EDACS talk groups.
The 800 mhz transmitter sites show three listed, if I am not mistaken. Also, the intended use of the system indicated, "YE: Public Safety/Spec Emerg and Public Safety Ntl Plan, 806-817/851." WPML266 (BELL COUNTY OF) FCC Callsign Details
The 700 license has a different statement about the intended use of the system, 90.523 "CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY LOCAL AND INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS." [sorry but it was listed in caps] with one location transmitter site in Belton. -This license appeared to be established in 2005: WQON926 (BELL, COUNTY OF) FCC Callsign Details
I am rather confused myself. At present, I am completely ignoring the aforementioned dead AC/CC 700 mhz frequencies listed since I am monitoring the system at Morgan's point, near Belton and hearing tons of talk groups that I'm having trouble following. I listened to hours of these recordings during the family Thanksgiving boredom. I am listening for agency identification, talk group name, etc. I am assuming that Bell County transmissions involving the word "center" makes reference to Bell County LE.
Also, I need to sit down and understand what the tip I received regarding the numbering of the systems from EDACS transferring to Harris P25. There was something about adding digits to the old EDACS talk groups.
The 800 mhz transmitter sites show three listed, if I am not mistaken. Also, the intended use of the system indicated, "YE: Public Safety/Spec Emerg and Public Safety Ntl Plan, 806-817/851." WPML266 (BELL COUNTY OF) FCC Callsign Details
The 700 license has a different statement about the intended use of the system, 90.523 "CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY LOCAL AND INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS." [sorry but it was listed in caps] with one location transmitter site in Belton. -This license appeared to be established in 2005: WQON926 (BELL, COUNTY OF) FCC Callsign Details
Insight
Judging by your handle, you are in the know, for sure. I am new to analyzing simulcast systems. I've only dealt with systems with one set of system frequencies.
Judging by your handle, you are in the know, for sure. I am new to analyzing simulcast systems. I've only dealt with systems with one set of system frequencies.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2016
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 10
The 700 stuff should be completely ignored. They have nothing to do with the P25 system we are monitoring. When the new info was added I believe it was attached to this system for the sake of having a convenient place to put it and not fully knowing if they are or are not related. As time passes I am gonna bet that a separation of the two sets will occur and the 700 stuff will again be all alone.
Ledger Getting Full
At present, I have discovered around 25 different talk groups on this system. Some, are obvious. Others, I scratch my head on these. I am getting close. The more documentation I have, the more accurate I can be with my submission. I submitted Temple PD Dispatch as well as Bell SO Main Dispatch.
Yesterday, they were looking for some loser on TG 50294. I watched the news last night and found that the person in question was being sought by Killeen PD. During this long ordeal, I heard: talk about luxury cars sticking out in a run down neighborhood, referred to as "fancy cars"; the talk of a "manhunt", talk of DPS air looking for loser; talk of said agency watching a video of suspect location and the mention of someone being within "three meters." Maybe, just maybe, he had a monitor or tracking device installed. Who knows?
If some of you have loaded these frequencies into your radio, I would appreciate some help. Once, I am finished reviewing days of these recordings, I will list the aforementioned cumulative list of talk groups.
At present, I have discovered around 25 different talk groups on this system. Some, are obvious. Others, I scratch my head on these. I am getting close. The more documentation I have, the more accurate I can be with my submission. I submitted Temple PD Dispatch as well as Bell SO Main Dispatch.
Yesterday, they were looking for some loser on TG 50294. I watched the news last night and found that the person in question was being sought by Killeen PD. During this long ordeal, I heard: talk about luxury cars sticking out in a run down neighborhood, referred to as "fancy cars"; the talk of a "manhunt", talk of DPS air looking for loser; talk of said agency watching a video of suspect location and the mention of someone being within "three meters." Maybe, just maybe, he had a monitor or tracking device installed. Who knows?
If some of you have loaded these frequencies into your radio, I would appreciate some help. Once, I am finished reviewing days of these recordings, I will list the aforementioned cumulative list of talk groups.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2016
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 10
50294 is Killeen Swat 1. I have heard traffic on this one. Just add 50 to the beginning of the Dec talkgroup on the EDACS system and voila. 50289 is KPD dispatch, which is readily apparent from monitoring. 50291 is KPD Tac 1. I have monitored others and they all follow the same formula. Feel free to submit these if you wish. I posted Belton PD dispatch in an earlier post here so feel free to submit it. I will post what I find here and you can do as you wish with them. I do enough button pushing to last a life time so this is my limit in pecking buttons.
ce2576
Member
Then the RR database is wrong as it shows that
TG on the P25 system as Bell County Sheriff.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2016
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 10
Yes it is absolutely wrong. I have personally monitored this talkgroup. It is KPD dispatch. And like I said just add 50 to the 3 digit EDACS decimal and that is the P25 equivalent. Add 5 to a 4 digit decimal for the equivalent. The Temple talkgroup is correct. If these are to be correct then whoever is submitting needs to do some careful monitoring. There is really no trick to this matter. Simple math. And it helps to have 2 scanners so the EDACS can be monitored at the same time. I just love the 1 second delay between the two. Lets get it right people. Right now 50% of the database is wrong. I know that is only 1 talkgroup but no since in letting it get worse.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2016
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 10
And one other thing, unless my 436 is getting ill this system is phase 2. Plenty of comms coming through as such.
Social Distortion: "I Was Wrong"
A brief examination of this thread will show the source of the Bell County submission, post 49.
So, let me get this correct. You already know how to convert these groups by adding 50 to the EDACS decimal. I believe this formula would look something like this, 50 + 337 = 50337, right? If you've already figured this system out, what is the purpose of monitoring them if you are sure of said methodology?
Yes, I see some talk groups on the EDACS need refinement. I worked with and personally trained MCOT deputies & never ever heard them refer to LE 1 talk group as LE1 East. Bell SO Mental Health Deputies can be identified by green shirts and khaki pants. They work the entire county. Not all have blacked-out patrol units. Some are white (the only one I know recently passed in a boating accident, very difficult funeral to attend).
At present, I am still documenting PV talk groups; however, they are listed in AFS format. For instance, I have yet to identify: 09-045; 09-047; 09-062; 09-097 (frequently used) and a rarely used countywide 08-103. Most of these are surveillance. However, I am still able to differentiate whether these are Temple PD exclusive or a countywide surveillance group. I am also attempting to determine whether some of these are Vice or exclusive to Narcotics. I do know that Temple PD knows they are being monitored because I have the audio recordings to support my contention. Thank God for my 16GB SD card, LOL.
So, in the absence of a 3 digit EDACS decimal, please provide a simplified version of how 08-103 can be submitted to RR in the new P25 format.
I also noted that you identified 50% of the DB as being wrong? Please, be more specific. Are you referring to: Bell EDACS; Bell P25; or the entire RR DB? Since only one of two talk groups are right for the new P25, I am assuming you are making reference to this system. Am I correct?
Thanks for all you do for the integrity of this robust system. I don't usually make stupid mistakes like this but I did. I suppose I got wrapped into the excitement of analyzing a new system and shot my wad in a premature manner, not my style. I have two 436HP units and one trusty PSR 500 in operation. Both Unidens have DMR and PV.
Sorry folks.
A brief examination of this thread will show the source of the Bell County submission, post 49.
So, let me get this correct. You already know how to convert these groups by adding 50 to the EDACS decimal. I believe this formula would look something like this, 50 + 337 = 50337, right? If you've already figured this system out, what is the purpose of monitoring them if you are sure of said methodology?
Yes, I see some talk groups on the EDACS need refinement. I worked with and personally trained MCOT deputies & never ever heard them refer to LE 1 talk group as LE1 East. Bell SO Mental Health Deputies can be identified by green shirts and khaki pants. They work the entire county. Not all have blacked-out patrol units. Some are white (the only one I know recently passed in a boating accident, very difficult funeral to attend).
At present, I am still documenting PV talk groups; however, they are listed in AFS format. For instance, I have yet to identify: 09-045; 09-047; 09-062; 09-097 (frequently used) and a rarely used countywide 08-103. Most of these are surveillance. However, I am still able to differentiate whether these are Temple PD exclusive or a countywide surveillance group. I am also attempting to determine whether some of these are Vice or exclusive to Narcotics. I do know that Temple PD knows they are being monitored because I have the audio recordings to support my contention. Thank God for my 16GB SD card, LOL.
So, in the absence of a 3 digit EDACS decimal, please provide a simplified version of how 08-103 can be submitted to RR in the new P25 format.
I also noted that you identified 50% of the DB as being wrong? Please, be more specific. Are you referring to: Bell EDACS; Bell P25; or the entire RR DB? Since only one of two talk groups are right for the new P25, I am assuming you are making reference to this system. Am I correct?
Thanks for all you do for the integrity of this robust system. I don't usually make stupid mistakes like this but I did. I suppose I got wrapped into the excitement of analyzing a new system and shot my wad in a premature manner, not my style. I have two 436HP units and one trusty PSR 500 in operation. Both Unidens have DMR and PV.
Sorry folks.
Last edited:
50+ DEC
I am reviewing the advice given specific to adding 50 to the DEC to obtain the new P25 talk groups.
I got the first one correct, Temple, according to another listener. I submitted 51185. However, I obtained this from listening and confirming: hearing the agency source, Temple, stating, "Temple to unit (plug in)." If I added 50 to 1185, this would mean 501185. I have yet to hear or record this talk group. In fact, all of the talk groups I've monitored have contained 5 digits, all beginning with 5.
Another question arose when I was thinking about this atypical process of identifying talk groups for accurate RR DB submission.
What about this talk group? DEC of 1058 & AFS of 08-042 Tem Citywide.
If I were to use the aforementioned methodology of 50 + DEC, I would come up with 501058 for this talk group.
Hence, I will continue to utilize my process of talk group verification through the following means: direct observation of LE unit; hearing LE agency self-identification; talking to LE friends/associates, off record; or submit a FOAI form, something I detest doing.
I have my other 436 sitting on the table awaiting shipment for the clock issue. Due to my derailed situation, I have not sent this in yet. I refuse to turn the damn thing on. When I'm ready, I will send it in for repair. I figured out and submitted the original PV talk groups for Temple PD on this little beast.
Since I've had the unfortunate experience of interacting with Temple PD in a professional capacity, most of it comical in nature, I suspect they will maintain the EDACS lesser-known talk groups to conduct their business. I don't know if they can hold out. At present, there are far fewer scanners that can monitor their system using PV. I am afraid, when they move to P25, if this is proposed, they will DE.
They have been honest in their establishment of PC according to my many recordings of such. They will not pull someone over unless they violate a traffic law or commit a crime in the presence of LE eyes. Hopefully, the police chief from KC will turn this department around. At least they employed rubber bullets when the schizophrenic client took the Methodist Church on Adams hostage in the recent past.
I am going to be even more OCD in my methodology since I've suffered a narcissistic injury, LMFAO.
To quote Jim Jefferies, "I think we can all do better."
I am reviewing the advice given specific to adding 50 to the DEC to obtain the new P25 talk groups.
I got the first one correct, Temple, according to another listener. I submitted 51185. However, I obtained this from listening and confirming: hearing the agency source, Temple, stating, "Temple to unit (plug in)." If I added 50 to 1185, this would mean 501185. I have yet to hear or record this talk group. In fact, all of the talk groups I've monitored have contained 5 digits, all beginning with 5.
Another question arose when I was thinking about this atypical process of identifying talk groups for accurate RR DB submission.
What about this talk group? DEC of 1058 & AFS of 08-042 Tem Citywide.
If I were to use the aforementioned methodology of 50 + DEC, I would come up with 501058 for this talk group.
Hence, I will continue to utilize my process of talk group verification through the following means: direct observation of LE unit; hearing LE agency self-identification; talking to LE friends/associates, off record; or submit a FOAI form, something I detest doing.
I have my other 436 sitting on the table awaiting shipment for the clock issue. Due to my derailed situation, I have not sent this in yet. I refuse to turn the damn thing on. When I'm ready, I will send it in for repair. I figured out and submitted the original PV talk groups for Temple PD on this little beast.
Since I've had the unfortunate experience of interacting with Temple PD in a professional capacity, most of it comical in nature, I suspect they will maintain the EDACS lesser-known talk groups to conduct their business. I don't know if they can hold out. At present, there are far fewer scanners that can monitor their system using PV. I am afraid, when they move to P25, if this is proposed, they will DE.
They have been honest in their establishment of PC according to my many recordings of such. They will not pull someone over unless they violate a traffic law or commit a crime in the presence of LE eyes. Hopefully, the police chief from KC will turn this department around. At least they employed rubber bullets when the schizophrenic client took the Methodist Church on Adams hostage in the recent past.
I am going to be even more OCD in my methodology since I've suffered a narcissistic injury, LMFAO.
To quote Jim Jefferies, "I think we can all do better."
Last edited:
nd5y
Member
If the old talkgroup is 4 digits add a 5, not 50, and see if it matches.
Killeen PD Tac-1
Now that I'm gun shy about submitting in a premature manner, I am being very careful about what I'm submitting. I hate to get things wrong!
Tonight, I parked on the channel for the probable talk group for Killeen Dispatch as the listener previously mentioned. The unnamed dispatch reported a robbery had been committed and then told the officers to go to Tac-1. I heard them on 50291. As indicated, adding 50 worked for this group as well, provided this is Killeen, which I suspect is highly likely. Again, I will not submit unless I actually hear them say Killeen.
So, we are on the right track. I greatly appreciate all of the input, even when I mess up. I will always own my behavior.
However, I have yet to examine the emission designator codes to see if any Phase II activity is present. At present, this is listed as Phase I. Since I've been recording most of the transmissions and reviewing them at night, I don't know whether the Phase I/Phase II icon is present in this mode on my 436HP.
I think I doing fairly well, even on Codeine, LMFAO.
Now that I'm gun shy about submitting in a premature manner, I am being very careful about what I'm submitting. I hate to get things wrong!
Tonight, I parked on the channel for the probable talk group for Killeen Dispatch as the listener previously mentioned. The unnamed dispatch reported a robbery had been committed and then told the officers to go to Tac-1. I heard them on 50291. As indicated, adding 50 worked for this group as well, provided this is Killeen, which I suspect is highly likely. Again, I will not submit unless I actually hear them say Killeen.
So, we are on the right track. I greatly appreciate all of the input, even when I mess up. I will always own my behavior.
However, I have yet to examine the emission designator codes to see if any Phase II activity is present. At present, this is listed as Phase I. Since I've been recording most of the transmissions and reviewing them at night, I don't know whether the Phase I/Phase II icon is present in this mode on my 436HP.
I think I doing fairly well, even on Codeine, LMFAO.
Last edited:
Cumulative List of Talk Groups
At this point in time, I have monitored and made notes on the following talk groups: [key for listings, UD = undetermined status]
51185 [established and submitted as Temple PD dispatch]
50289 [heard this talk group being referred to as "Area 1", mention of "Center", the locations extended from W.S. Young to Belton, suspected Bell County TG, UD]
50508 [unknown, mentioned a South Main address, suspect Belton PD or Bell SO, mentioned MM 293 SB, IH-35, UD]
50561 [UD]
50593 [UD]
50299 [sounds like detectives talking, mention of Summerland or Sutherland Apartments, east Rancier suspect Killeen PD, UD]
50534 [have heard "Temple to Medic 1" on this one, also heard the use of "center", UD]
50810 [mention of Trimmier & Terrace intersection, wreck at loop 121 and E 190, unknown if Harker Heights or SO, UD]
50497 [unknown LE agency, use of unit 1806, UD]
50502 [mention of Black Hills trail, sounds like SO, "going back to main", some car-to-car transmissions, mention of this being Channel 7, choppy transmission heard from listening post in Morgan's Point, have heard info on this channel (NCIC, etc), heard mention of outstanding warrants, also heard, "she is suicidal.", UD]
50498 [heard this being referred to as "Bell County One", heard them talking about suspect wearing hoodie, heard transmission about disturbance at area school, use of the term "center", addresses noted included Live Oak, 500 block of Bonnie, and Hurley Street", "Unit 1713 to Center", "mention of 5610 unit, suspect SO, UD]
50337 [suspected SO TG, UD]
50493 [UD]
50609 [thought I heard MA1, UD]
50497 [unit number was 6185, mention of FM 3219, Harker Heights, heard them mention Salado, UD]
50670 [heard South 31st street, "EMS-1", "center out.", possible county EMS, UD]
50577 [suspect Belton F, UD]
50545 [heard tone out, "Engine 6, use of term "center", "center to Med 5, Med 8 to center, mention of S&W, UD]
51158 [UD]
50294 {UD]
50303 ["Charlie Rover en route", UD]
50718 [sounds like LE talk, UD]
50505 [talk of Rottweiler, talk of deer, term "center was being used", UD]
50543 [use of "alpha and delta, suspect these are jail wings, sounded like jail background noise, like in a incarceration center, UD]
50499 [ID as a Temple PD TG, UD]
50294 [in debate, mention of crime scene, use of term "center", fancy cars sticking out in neighborhood, active manhunt, mention of DPS air, talk of video and suspect, unusual amount of foot traffic at house, "suspect within 3 meters", UD]
50291 [address mentioned, Lake Road & Branch Drive, suspect Killeen, area, suspected SO, heard, "going back to main.", UD]
50291 [address mentioned, "Lake Road and Branch Drive, Killeen suspected, "going back to main", possible SO, UD]
The aforementioned listings are to help isolate. Be advised. I have hours of recording left to review. Quite possibly, I might be able to narrow some of these down.
Again, if you like, put these little beasts into your radio and see what you hear.
Again, all of these Talk Groups begin with "5."
At this point in time, I have monitored and made notes on the following talk groups: [key for listings, UD = undetermined status]
51185 [established and submitted as Temple PD dispatch]
50289 [heard this talk group being referred to as "Area 1", mention of "Center", the locations extended from W.S. Young to Belton, suspected Bell County TG, UD]
50508 [unknown, mentioned a South Main address, suspect Belton PD or Bell SO, mentioned MM 293 SB, IH-35, UD]
50561 [UD]
50593 [UD]
50299 [sounds like detectives talking, mention of Summerland or Sutherland Apartments, east Rancier suspect Killeen PD, UD]
50534 [have heard "Temple to Medic 1" on this one, also heard the use of "center", UD]
50810 [mention of Trimmier & Terrace intersection, wreck at loop 121 and E 190, unknown if Harker Heights or SO, UD]
50497 [unknown LE agency, use of unit 1806, UD]
50502 [mention of Black Hills trail, sounds like SO, "going back to main", some car-to-car transmissions, mention of this being Channel 7, choppy transmission heard from listening post in Morgan's Point, have heard info on this channel (NCIC, etc), heard mention of outstanding warrants, also heard, "she is suicidal.", UD]
50498 [heard this being referred to as "Bell County One", heard them talking about suspect wearing hoodie, heard transmission about disturbance at area school, use of the term "center", addresses noted included Live Oak, 500 block of Bonnie, and Hurley Street", "Unit 1713 to Center", "mention of 5610 unit, suspect SO, UD]
50337 [suspected SO TG, UD]
50493 [UD]
50609 [thought I heard MA1, UD]
50497 [unit number was 6185, mention of FM 3219, Harker Heights, heard them mention Salado, UD]
50670 [heard South 31st street, "EMS-1", "center out.", possible county EMS, UD]
50577 [suspect Belton F, UD]
50545 [heard tone out, "Engine 6, use of term "center", "center to Med 5, Med 8 to center, mention of S&W, UD]
51158 [UD]
50294 {UD]
50303 ["Charlie Rover en route", UD]
50718 [sounds like LE talk, UD]
50505 [talk of Rottweiler, talk of deer, term "center was being used", UD]
50543 [use of "alpha and delta, suspect these are jail wings, sounded like jail background noise, like in a incarceration center, UD]
50499 [ID as a Temple PD TG, UD]
50294 [in debate, mention of crime scene, use of term "center", fancy cars sticking out in neighborhood, active manhunt, mention of DPS air, talk of video and suspect, unusual amount of foot traffic at house, "suspect within 3 meters", UD]
50291 [address mentioned, Lake Road & Branch Drive, suspect Killeen, area, suspected SO, heard, "going back to main.", UD]
50291 [address mentioned, "Lake Road and Branch Drive, Killeen suspected, "going back to main", possible SO, UD]
The aforementioned listings are to help isolate. Be advised. I have hours of recording left to review. Quite possibly, I might be able to narrow some of these down.
Again, if you like, put these little beasts into your radio and see what you hear.
Again, all of these Talk Groups begin with "5."
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2016
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 10
Man that sounds like a labor intensive way of doing it. I have one scanner with the EDACS and one with the P25 and it is so painfully easy to match them up I can almost sleep while doing it. But if dissecting recordings is your thing then by all means enjoy. And I said it before and I will say it again, 50289 is Killeen PD dispatch. Ok I'm bored and done trying to convince of how easy it is document this system.
Different Strokes
Sir, I am not disagreeing with you. I am saying "likely" because that is just the way I roll. No, you helped me out by giving me a wake-up call on the potential mistake I made, already. Thank you. That, is not my style. I greatly appreciate your help, particularly since I am not always in Belton/Killeen since I reside in Waco. The 50 + DEC is a wonderful way of figuring this out. But, I am still confused about how this applies to a DEC in the 1000 range. If it works for most, let's rock and roll! LOL.
Once I'm done with my "field observations", I will go back and potentially correct the original EDACS alpha tags.
Here are examples of some inexact talk groups from the original EDACS system that drive me straight up the wall, I am sticking with the DEC to illustrate my point: 1044, Bell County SO unk use; 317-? 16XX UNITS on the ADMIN? ALAMO? ANIMAL? Ch; 619-TROY 1ST RESPONDERS ??; and almost every talk group listed beneath the listed, "unknown talk groups."
I recently submitted LEA1 when I directly observed a MCOT Deputy responding to a call during the training I was conducting for them. Now, I am thinking this means, "Law Enforcement, Area 1." I should have asked him. When I submitted this, the RR DB showed LE1 East. If this is east, this does not explain why they would be using this talk group since they work the entire county, not only east.
My ultimate goal is to have the exact alpha tag on an officer's radio, but again, this usually comes from a FOIA submissions which I want to avoid for many reasons.
Hence, I want to recheck my observations, even when I do it. I was trained by a student of B.F. Skinner. I have extensive training in documenting behavioral data, but even I grow weary of that level of rigor. At times, I can be a lazy behaviorist. LOL.
So, what I am saying is, I agree with you, "let's get this right." I am trying my hardest to do that.
Please, don't be shy. If you are convinced that DEC is Killeen, Texas, which I strongly suspect you are spot-on right, please submit such.
Please, don't get the wrong impression. I am not challenging you. In fact, I am impressed with what you've written and the enthusiasm you've emitted in "our" quest for numbers. One, day, perhaps, we can meet and discuss this over a cup of Joe.
The original EDACS needs some tidying up. Now, we can kill two birds with one stone by figuring the new system out while refining the old.
I can say one thing for sure. After reviewing the emission designator codes, I don't see any Phase II activity.
One of the main reasons I am doing this, at this time in my life, is to displace my ruminations over the medical procedures I am facing. I have never experienced oncology treatment. I don't know what to expect, but I know it ain't going to be fun. Now, I am blessed with tons of internally-recorded talk groups I can focus my mind on because I don't want to look at the other patients there.
Thank God I have patient folks within my family because I have my over-the-ear earphone in my ear most of the day and night. Some folks become annoyed when I say, "what, just a minute" while removing my earphone. Oh well.
Sir, I am not disagreeing with you. I am saying "likely" because that is just the way I roll. No, you helped me out by giving me a wake-up call on the potential mistake I made, already. Thank you. That, is not my style. I greatly appreciate your help, particularly since I am not always in Belton/Killeen since I reside in Waco. The 50 + DEC is a wonderful way of figuring this out. But, I am still confused about how this applies to a DEC in the 1000 range. If it works for most, let's rock and roll! LOL.
Once I'm done with my "field observations", I will go back and potentially correct the original EDACS alpha tags.
Here are examples of some inexact talk groups from the original EDACS system that drive me straight up the wall, I am sticking with the DEC to illustrate my point: 1044, Bell County SO unk use; 317-? 16XX UNITS on the ADMIN? ALAMO? ANIMAL? Ch; 619-TROY 1ST RESPONDERS ??; and almost every talk group listed beneath the listed, "unknown talk groups."
I recently submitted LEA1 when I directly observed a MCOT Deputy responding to a call during the training I was conducting for them. Now, I am thinking this means, "Law Enforcement, Area 1." I should have asked him. When I submitted this, the RR DB showed LE1 East. If this is east, this does not explain why they would be using this talk group since they work the entire county, not only east.
My ultimate goal is to have the exact alpha tag on an officer's radio, but again, this usually comes from a FOIA submissions which I want to avoid for many reasons.
Hence, I want to recheck my observations, even when I do it. I was trained by a student of B.F. Skinner. I have extensive training in documenting behavioral data, but even I grow weary of that level of rigor. At times, I can be a lazy behaviorist. LOL.
So, what I am saying is, I agree with you, "let's get this right." I am trying my hardest to do that.
Please, don't be shy. If you are convinced that DEC is Killeen, Texas, which I strongly suspect you are spot-on right, please submit such.
Please, don't get the wrong impression. I am not challenging you. In fact, I am impressed with what you've written and the enthusiasm you've emitted in "our" quest for numbers. One, day, perhaps, we can meet and discuss this over a cup of Joe.
The original EDACS needs some tidying up. Now, we can kill two birds with one stone by figuring the new system out while refining the old.
I can say one thing for sure. After reviewing the emission designator codes, I don't see any Phase II activity.
One of the main reasons I am doing this, at this time in my life, is to displace my ruminations over the medical procedures I am facing. I have never experienced oncology treatment. I don't know what to expect, but I know it ain't going to be fun. Now, I am blessed with tons of internally-recorded talk groups I can focus my mind on because I don't want to look at the other patients there.
Thank God I have patient folks within my family because I have my over-the-ear earphone in my ear most of the day and night. Some folks become annoyed when I say, "what, just a minute" while removing my earphone. Oh well.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
