Chicago FD Freq issues.incorrect NAC on input freqs..trying to update my files...

Status
Not open for further replies.

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
Recently obtained a "channel card" for the nifty new CFD P25 system

Found the following errors....


CITYWIDE FIRE 476.6875(293 NAC) /479.6875(ABD NAC)

JOINT OPS 477.9875(293 NAC) 480.9875 (396 NAC)

FIRE TAC 470.1632 (97.4) 473.1625 (97.4)


CITYWIDE INPUT does not have accurate NAC code
nor does JOINT OPS.
And the FIRE TAC freq isnt active at my radio vantage point

I routinely monitor inputs because of units in close proximity. (I can hear them better)

What Im asking for here is ACCURATE NAC info for the input freqs. I do not have equipment to read NAC other wise this would be a mute polnt and the people that claim to have this information out here are not too forthcoming with it. Any HELP or ACCURATE information would be appreciated so I can have updated and CURRENT files. Thanks!
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
well its not hard to get....

Im sure its a misprint on the card as there are also SEVERAL mistakes with input/output offsets and such,.

as far as their having some reason not to give it out I dont think its that, I think moreover there is a

typo and misinformation on the info I have already. Hence the reason Im asking to verify what I have against

what someone else may have. Pretty simple.
 

werinshades

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,512
Location
Chicago , IL
I do have the correct input NAC Codes and as stated they will not be coming from me. I was asked by those who know that I'm a scanner enthusiast on CFD not to provide input NAC Codes as it's a step closer to being able to transmit on our system. The "only" real reason I see to have this information is someone wants to transmit on the CFD digital system. As you mentioned in your Private Message that you have "clients" that need this information. If your only purpose is to "monitor" the system, then output NAC Code 293 will suffice. If you have other intent , then that information will not be coming from me, but you'll have to seek it out on your own. The radios also have an access code which is needed to transmit on the system. What I have provided in the database suffices for those who are scanner hobbyists. Thanks...
 

FFPM571

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Messages
1,253
Location
Chicago area
If you have " clients" who need it then you must have a business. In all reality the only one who needs such information is the CFD. Anything else can be monitored on a scanner on the repeater output.
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
ok lets try this again

Client equipment has already been flashed RXO
I am not in the 2 way radio business nor do I own any Xmit Equipment
other than my company radio which is 800 trunk.

What I DO own is RXO only and I did state that I like to monitor Inputs
which in and of itself is a sufficient explanation as to the need for that information.
The statement "one step closer to talking on the system" is both assumptive
and inflammatory, No where was posted written intended or suggested that
the reason for this info was to breach a system. Too many lives depend on that radio
system for anyone out side of it to be able to access it albeit suburban FD Command,ect.
It was my understanding this site was info share friendly. Unless you have signed some
document of secrecy and have a special handshake wink or nod, your comment was not only inappropriate
but highly presumptive and not at all appreciated,Sir.


If you would like a legal disclaimer

I do not intend on using this information for any unlawful purpose.
The SOLE and ONLY purpose for the request of this information is to update
my personal files and better equip my receive equipment.

That said, if you would like to PM the Info or corroborate what I posted as either being
accurate or in accurate(with the appropriate corrections) your assistance would be appreciated.

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
actually as stated I like to monitor both sides. in and out. How YOU chose to monitor is your prerogative Sir,I like any other Scanner Enthusiast,have the options to monitor what we chose. Ive monitored INPUTS from the old VHF system for years and its proven very helpful when the system fails, has issues or does not repeat correctly. Further monitoring INPUTS proves helpful when field units call for the "mobile relay" to be shut off. That said,Sir, I see no issue in MY choice of what I chose to monitor. Unless there is encryption involved,there is nothing wrong with that. For years Ive been on this site and shared AMPLE amounts of info with regards to in/out tone dpl NAC UID SID ect information with out being subject to interrogation and assumptions. Before you decide to jump on the band wagon of those MAKING those assumptions, its always best to be fully informed. Thanks! Happy Scanning.
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
well thats not true. the NAC code $293 is required to monitor the output.

Since there is a nac code on the input and the intent is monitoring the input one
would need that code. The 293 code applies AFTER the input has reached the repeated and is rebroadcast out. Monitoring an input freq with the 293 code would not work. so yes
a nac code for input would be required so as to receive it prior to it going to the repeater.
 

mikewazowski

Forums Manager/Global DB Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
11,674
Location
Central Ontario
As JoeyC said, if you are using a scanner, you do not need a NAC.
If you're using a 2 way radio, then you use the equivalent carrier squelch NAC.
 

krokus

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
4,525
Location
Southeastern Michigan
The statement "one step closer to talking on the system" is both assumptive
and inflammatory, No where was posted written intended or suggested that
the reason for this info was to breach a system. Too many lives depend on that radio
system...
Assuming you are here at face value, others might use publicized info. Sharing of info is much freer than other sites I have seen, but many of us on this site are users or maintainers of these life safety systems. (Some are both.)

The NAC provided above will monitor any NAC on the input.

Sent via Tapatalk
 

ofd8001

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
6,947
Location
Louisville, KY
A couple of "war stories" on the reluctance to share critical information on radio systems.

Our outdoor warning sirens are radio activated. Someone got the correct information and programmed up a radio. They went around setting off the tornado sirens, creating a lot of undue anxiety. So the whole system had to be re-programmed at a great cost.

A few years later, another person programmed up their portable radio with the frequency used to dispatch firefighters, such that it would transmit the tones to alert firefighter pagers. This was done at all hours of the night. Fortunately it was done one time too often and the person got familiar with the judicial system.

It is too bad that one or two folks with evil in the hearts do things to the detriment of many other good folks. Until that predicament goes away, cards will be played close to the vest for communications along with lots of other things.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,133
Location
Peoria, IL
A couple of "war stories" on the reluctance to share critical information on radio systems.

Our outdoor warning sirens are radio activated. Someone got the correct information and programmed up a radio. They went around setting off the tornado sirens, creating a lot of undue anxiety. So the whole system had to be re-programmed at a great cost.

A few years later, another person programmed up their portable radio with the frequency used to dispatch firefighters, such that it would transmit the tones to alert firefighter pagers. This was done at all hours of the night. Fortunately it was done one time too often and the person got familiar with the judicial system.

It is too bad that one or two folks with evil in the hearts do things to the detriment of many other good folks. Until that predicament goes away, cards will be played close to the vest for communications along with lots of other things.
Want to jump in the thead to add my comment. I cant belive that someone would do that and actvate the outdoor sirens. That is bad you had to re-programm the whole system because of senseless people. There is a reason fire,police and ems does not want people to know the input tones. There is a thing called a closed system or closed reapeater. Where the input tone will be different from the output so there wont be inference on the repeater if you know what I mean ;).
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
evil people

I did discuss with a member here the incidents a few years back on CFD fire( dont remember if Main or Englewood) but party or parties got on the band and were racial, and obscene. It made a few cringe.Now at the time Main and Englewood transmitted a VERY long distance without "conditions" as I recall hearing some of that mess while I was out in Braidwood working on the Nuke Plant (delivering sheet metal to be exact)
Hence the need tor a secure system. They "tried" with a scrutinizer but that apparently got defeated. Now there is P25 and it is a secure frequency as far as I can tell.

As far as NAC 293 being able to read an input freq using a different NAC either I dont understand
NAC or Im comparing its use to that of CTCSS/DPL Please by all means correct me if Im wrong as Id like to understand the new technology. My understanding is (and I could be wrong here) that if you were listening to lets say as example 481 NAC you would need 481 NAC on the receiver.Typically most systems use $293 on RX and TX with chicago and IDOT being an exception using $293 on RX and an ever chaging (OAP) TX NAC.

I also understand that the input goes to the repeater then the repeater outputs the signal with the $293 which is the FEMA and other Agency Standard. What Im trying to do is listen to close proximity BEFORE it gets to the repeater. A good example is listening to CPD Zone 2 460.050 OUT 465.050 IN 127.3 PL x2. When they ask to shut off the relay, the ONLY way you can hear whats being said is by monitoring INPUT and most of the time using a preamp unless they are close by. Im applying THAT theory to P25 and from what Ive heard over the last month on "MAIN" they have "shut off the relay" 5 times already due to eithe a need for the Crime Lab at a fire scene or critical or gravely injured firemen or civilians. Under those circumstances(hopefully RARE) it would be nice to hear whats going on.

I do respect wearishandes position and he IS making the right call. Whomever entrusted him to be discreet with that info the man gave his word, and Ill back that play 100%.

With respect to the guy setting off tones on a warning siren, thats pretty low.
A lot of that can be avoided by not posting that info. Ive seen "siren activation" listed next to many freqs and most activate with DTMF set to a fast rate. Dont know if you read about it, but in Romeoville Illinois a number of years back someone was running around opening Knox Boxes in the same manner. I agree that due to the foolishness of a few those with honest intentions have to suffer. But I do actually appreciate the insight given here and I AM learining more about P25 as days pass. Thanks to all for all info offered and wisdom passed.
 

Citywide173

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
1,921
Location
Attleboro, MA
If you have commercial equipment, won't F7E allow all NACs to pass? Since we're looking at exclusive use frequencies in the immediate area, it will allow you to have a NAC, while still respecting the security of the system.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,133
Location
Peoria, IL
I did discuss with a member here the incidents a few years back on CFD fire( dont remember if Main or Englewood) but party or parties got on the band and were racial, and obscene. It made a few cringe.Now at the time Main and Englewood transmitted a VERY long distance without "conditions" as I recall hearing some of that mess while I was out in Braidwood working on the Nuke Plant (delivering sheet metal to be exact)
Hence the need tor a secure system. They "tried" with a scrutinizer but that apparently got defeated. Now there is P25 and it is a secure frequency as far as I can tell.

As far as NAC 293 being able to read an input freq using a different NAC either I dont understand
NAC or Im comparing its use to that of CTCSS/DPL Please by all means correct me if Im wrong as Id like to understand the new technology. My understanding is (and I could be wrong here) that if you were listening to lets say as example 481 NAC you would need 481 NAC on the receiver.Typically most systems use $293 on RX and TX with chicago and IDOT being an exception using $293 on RX and an ever chaging (OAP) TX NAC.

I also understand that the input goes to the repeater then the repeater outputs the signal with the $293 which is the FEMA and other Agency Standard. What Im trying to do is listen to close proximity BEFORE it gets to the repeater. A good example is listening to CPD Zone 2 460.050 OUT 465.050 IN 127.3 PL x2. When they ask to shut off the relay, the ONLY way you can hear whats being said is by monitoring INPUT and most of the time using a preamp unless they are close by. Im applying THAT theory to P25 and from what Ive heard over the last month on "MAIN" they have "shut off the relay" 5 times already due to eithe a need for the Crime Lab at a fire scene or critical or gravely injured firemen or civilians. Under those circumstances(hopefully RARE) it would be nice to hear whats going on.

I do respect wearishandes position and he IS making the right call. Whomever entrusted him to be discreet with that info the man gave his word, and Ill back that play 100%.

With respect to the guy setting off tones on a warning siren, thats pretty low.
A lot of that can be avoided by not posting that info. Ive seen "siren activation" listed next to many freqs and most activate with DTMF set to a fast rate. Dont know if you read about it, but in Romeoville Illinois a number of years back someone was running around opening Knox Boxes in the same manner. I agree that due to the foolishness of a few those with honest intentions have to suffer. But I do actually appreciate the insight given here and I AM learining more about P25 as days pass. Thanks to all for all info offered and wisdom passed.
If you are using a scanner it is ok to me to programm the input tone. But if you are using commerial radios I would not be ok with giving out the input tone.
 

werinshades

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,512
Location
Chicago , IL
Let me chime in here...sometime ago prior to the Digital changeover, all of our portable radios were "re-programmed" for the new channel line up. Since I had access to a radio (Yes I work for CFD) and bring my 396XT to work during my down time (Yes, I'm odd), I decided to try out the Close Call feature and see if I could get the new channels and PL/NAC Codes. This way, I won't ask anyone to give me this info from the radio shops and no one would get in trouble.

When I was able to confirm the information, I submitted it here for the database so everyone would have the new channel line up prior to the switch occurring and we won't be scrambling around guessing channels etc. I did find some errors and did notice the input NAC differed from the output NAC. My duties caused me to take a trip to the CFD radio shops where I have made friends over the years. I asked the question as to why the NAC's differed and was told "it was by design" as a layer of security to the system. Once they knew how I did it, they asked that I not provide the input NAC codes publicly which I have not.

I feel like I provided enough information for the average scanner listener who monitors CFD. I have provided the new frequencies, PL tones and receive NAC codes as well as channel "names". We currently use 2 Zones (Fire Zone, EMS Zone) and while the channels numbers may differ, the names stay the same. Example is City-Wide Fire (Channel 13 on both Fire and EMS Zones) which is an alternate channel in the event of a channel issue. OPS-10 has been used heavily as the "Staging area channel" as many have figured out during extra alarms such as today's 3-11. EMS OPS is simplex for EMS and is still being called "OPS-7" because that's the channel number on the EMS Zone.

If their are any CFD channel or operational changes which I believe someone who monitors the system and would benefit or helping to listen, I will continue to provide it. I hope this helps explains my apprehension in providing the information. If you're good at monitoring and you REALLY want to find out, then have fun seeking it out yourself....that's what makes this hobby a thrill sometimes.
 

cortchubby

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
41
Location
Chicago Illinois
Re: chime in

Agree. "back in the day" when new repeaters would "pop up" it WAS a thrill to hunt down the particulars of the repeaters and with the advance in scanning technology it IS the fun part of the hobby.Now,its as much fun hunting down NAC system ID ect and Starcom added a lot of excitement to the hobby as well.
I think (and hope) most of us out here are cognizant of the fact that we should (by ethics) abide by and enforce the ethical side of this hobby.One good thing about CFD going digital is there will no longer be
any interference from Milwaukee and from Arthur Illinois when there is band openings. If you recall,when that happened it got rough a few times on the old Main Frequency.

Side note..during a few "incidents" at Midway and Ohare lately fire ground and admin was hopping as well.
I ran across a few of the "press" at one Midway incident and they were frantically trying to program hand held scanners to hear any info. At one point one press member asked if I knew any info on the radios and I looked at the poor guy like he was speaking french and said with my best innocent choir boy look,,"gee no sir, I dont"
(which I did, but remembering this and wearinshades promise to keep it under the helmet)

I think the new radio system is a huge advance in Member Safety as well. More "on scene" operating channels and each member having a radio.In that line of work, as in mine safety of the member or the officer is first and foremost which is why I agree with and support "shades" position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top