Denver Chooses Motorola for P25 Phase II System, Public Safety will be Encrypted

[KD0DUJ]

City Council said no to encrypting the dispatch channels

 

[snoopyII]

City Council said no to encrypting the dispatch channels

If that indeed is true, good for them. Whether they realize it or not, City Council may have spared themselves dealing with the nightmare that Longmont is (or about to) going through now. I don't think any one of us can deny the fact that when or if implemented, there undoubtedly would be some type of outcry, especially if DPD was dumb enough to try and lock the media out. This is something the Denver media could have a field day with making DPD and the city look very bad in the process.

 

[Thayne]

I (over)heard some chatter about this when I was picking up some antennas at Talley last week; maybe that 700 MHZ filing mentioned above would add some credibility to this story because it will obviously be a big undertaking doing this switchover--and it HAS to work.
The impression I got while keeping my ears open and mouth shut, was that they would use the state system in some way while they are doing the switch--just think of all the transmitting & receiving infrastructure that has to be changed. I bet they HAVE to know it will work for sure before they stick a fork in the EDACS.

 

[Spitfire8520]

Looks like the new Denver system will have some 700 MHz component. New FCC filing (ULS Application - Trunked Public Safety 700 MHz - 0008405734 - DENVER, CITY AND COUNTY OF) is for 8 new 700 MHz frequencies. This filing is for temporary use, but attachment to filing says it is for improved coverage for the 700/800 MHz system.

I believe that Denver Fire Department is going to bring a mobile repeater system online to help with any coverage deficiencies. That is likely why the application is for temporary repeaters rather than in fixed locations.

If that indeed is true, good for them. Whether they realize it or not, City Council may have spared themselves dealing with the nightmare that Longmont is (or about to) going through now. I don't think any one of us can deny the fact that when or if implemented, there undoubtedly would be some type of outcry, especially if DPD was dumb enough to try and lock the media out. This is something the Denver media could have a field day with making DPD and the city look very bad in the process.

The outcry is pretty minimal if we are going to be complete objective here. Why else would 7 of Colorado's top 10 municipalities by population be completely encrypted absolutely no push back except for the occasional opinion editorial? I have strong doubts that the City Council will actually do much of anything once the "officer safety" and "privacy" keywords starts getting thrown around in their meetings.

 

[Spitfire8520]

Denver Fire Department has started to rollout their shiny new Motorola mobiles this week and are replacing their Harris mobiles in some of the rigs. This week saw replacements on many of the special purpose rigs and chief units.

How do Motorola radios work on EDACS? That answer is that they do not work on EDACS so they are currently using MARC with an interface back to EDACS. A majority of the identified talkgroups are now in the database for those who might want to try to listen. Many of the other talkgroups can be inferred, however I am not comfortable with submitting unconfirmed information. Thanks to our local DB admin for the extremely quick turnaround!

Not surprising seeing that Denver has a history of this approach to the scanning and media community since the early nineties.

...

Will DPD have the same policy as Aurora PD as in NO media access to L.E. groups?

I don't think any one of us can deny the fact that when or if implemented, there undoubtedly would be some type of outcry, especially if DPD was dumb enough to try and lock the media out. This is something the Denver media could have a field day with making DPD and the city look very bad in the process.

It is interesting to note this story that 9News/Next published nearly a year ago in which DPD had to walk back claims that their Twitter account provided "the fastest most accurate news about Denver". Their apology noted that "A free and independent media is a critical piece of a free society ... We also understand as a police department, that because of the impact we can have on people’s lives, we deserve a special degree of scrutiny, and the media is often in the best position to do that."

Seems like that apology was a false flag for their intentions revealed by their tweet. It's hard to have a special degree of scrutiny when you're the one controlling the information on what calls the media will learn about.

 

[Insulator]

The Denver Post has a big article regarding the "Big E " in today's edition on DPD's proposed system.

 

[Hans13]

The Denver Post has a big article regarding the "Big E " in today's edition on DPD's proposed system.

This one, I presume?

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/11/02/denver-police-radio-scanner-encryption/

 

[Insulator]

10-4.

 

[scanlist]

I'm pleasantly surprised on how well the Denver Post article is written. It will be interesting how the meeting with the media goes this time. It's a repeat of the situation in the 90's except this time the method of lockout is hardened.

Any idea where the Denver area media came up with Greeley being ENC? Dispatch groups are in the clear only the TAC groups are ENC.
.

 

[ScannerSK]

Any idea where the Denver area media came up with Greeley being ENC? Dispatch groups are in the clear only the TAC groups are ENC.

My assumption is the article is referring to the radios actively using encryption (even if only used on TAC channels).

Shawn

 

[scanlist]

Found a Motorola P25 Control Channel this evening on 859.2625 with ID of 9C5.

This is a former Public Works system frequency.

Let the logging begin!

 

[ScannerSK]

This frequency appears to be part of the following license:
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=KNNR200
Shawn

 

[scanlist]

This system appears to be a multi site configuration based on the neighbor information in my pro96com log. So far I am only copying this site up here. What few transmissions have shown up are in Phase II.

FileVersion:8
-TowerInfo
#This section is here for information only. With the exception
#of the Call Sign(s), This data is not Read back into the program at all.
System ID : 9C5
System Name :
WACN : BEE00
Tower Number (Decimal): 1-2
Tower Number (Hex) : T0102
Tower Description :
Control Capabilities : Data,Voice,Registration
Flavor : Phase 2
Call Sign(s) :
Timestamp : Tue Feb 12 19:37:42 2019

-Tables
#Format: Table ID,Base Freq,Spacing,Input Offset,Assumed/Confirmed,BandWidth,Slots
00,851.00625,0.00625,-45.00000,"Confirmed",0.01250,1
01,762.00625,0.00625,30.00000,"Confirmed",0.01250,1
02,851.01250,0.01250,-45.00000,"Confirmed",0.01250,2
03,762.00625,0.01250,30.00000,"Confirmed",0.01250,2

-Frequencies
#Format: Channel,Usage,Frequency(/Slot),Input Channel,Input Frequency(/Slot),Input Explicit(1/0),Hit Count
"00-0917","a",856.73750,"00-0917",811.73750,0,0
"00-0981","a",857.13750,"00-0981",812.13750,0,0
"00-1233","a",858.71250,"00-1233",813.71250,0,0
"00-1321","c",859.26250,"00-1321",814.26250,0,0
"02-0832","v",856.21250/0,"02-0832",811.21250/0,0,3
"02-0833","v",856.21250/1,"02-0833",811.21250/1,0,2

-Neighbors
#Format: TowerID,TowerIDHex,System ID,Channel,Frequency,Tower Name
104,"T0104",9c5,"00-1393",859.71250,""

Affiliations so far show TG's 35050, 35053, 35192 (DPD CLEAR 1) and 35600.

So far no callsign is being broadcast on the control channel.

 

[ScannerSK]

My assumption is this is the new Denver P25 police/fire/ems system that is currently in the testing phase. I believe it is slated to be a simulcast system. I noticed at lease one encrypted talkgroup this morning on the system. There was also a second neighbor tower of 105 with the same control channel frequency as tower 104 however it has since vanished.

I would imagine it is technically against the law to broadcast a control channel without a callsign even in the testing phase however this may not be true.

Shawn

 

[Spitfire8520]

One of the sites is online as per the New Denver P25 Site on the air thread. I believe that it is the standalone Mount Morrison site.

The new system brings bad news. It looks like all public safety will be encrypted based on testing on the public safety TG range as identified on MARC. This includes Denver Police, Denver Fire, and Denver Health. It looks like Denver took the encryption idea a lot further than what many were expecting. Enjoy the last months of being able to monitor Denver public safety while it lasts.

 

[abqscan]

Denver to encrypt police radio traffic, blocking the public — but not news organizations —from listening

 

[scanlist]

City Council said no to encrypting the dispatch channels

It's time to ask the city council why the change of heart. If there was any truth to to their position to begin with.

In any case Denver has been hell bent to restrict access to their comm since the cut-over to EDACS in December of 1992. The cat and mouse game continued in 2008 with the upgrade to ESK that was short lived thanks to Uniden and GRE.

Prior to advent of EDACS capable scanners the media had to purchase radios, mostly G.E. PCS portables, for around $1K+ and were programmed/Authorized by the EEB. This time they are looking at close to $5K+. With this expense I don't see too many takers.

DFD's Vocalarm/Dispatch simulcast on 154.070 may be it for a short while. Individual station alerting is becoming common on Mot P25 networks.

 

[Insulator]

Evident that the Chief has City Council in his back pocket like here in Longmont. I am definitely getting tired of the "officer safety" song and dance for a reason to go to the big E. 40 years and not once did a scanner effect my duties.

 

[Insulator]

No further comment.

 

[KD0DUJ]

Will DFD be encrypted