Just do the work.

[phask]

I can search, I have searched, I sometimes search.

MY reality. After doing this for 50+ years, and living in a rather rural area, I rarely need to.

 

[MUTNAV]

At some point—I'm not exactly sure when, the scanner hobby hit cruise control and slammed the brakes on curiosity. What used to be a playground for signal chasers and frequency sleuths has turned into a plug-and-play circus. Programming your own scanner? Barbaric. Researching a system? Unthinkable. If it doesn’t land in your GPS circle or pop up in some database, it might as well not exist. Using your brain? Apparently, that’s asking too much.

And oh, the database here- treated like the holy grail, yet somehow still missing huge chunks of business and industrial trunked systems. Want to guess why? Because the real info is hiding in plain sight—in the FCC’s Universal Licensing System under those YG class licenses no one bothers to check. Take a system I found in New Jersey: licensed, active for 2 years, but with zero fieldwork done on it. Meanwhile, folks keep griping about missing data without ever lifting a finger to fill in the blanks. Can't hear the major business next door? "Ah, must be encrypted or something."

Here’s the kicker: this isn’t about tech skills. It’s about effort and curiosity—two things that seem to have fled the building. Most scanner users don’t even know the FCC database exists. And if they do? They sure as hell aren’t touching it. If it’s not spoon-fed, they treat it like radioactive waste. The idea of uncovering undocumented systems? That’s for “experts” or masochists with too much free time. I have zero interest in a DMR system owned by a Hindu temple 1500 miles from me, but is there someone that might?

Meanwhile, the airwaves are alive and buzzing with systems no one’s logged, no one’s listening to, and no one even knows about. This hobby used to be about finding stuff, not downloading partial lists and calling it a day. So here’s a newsflash: if you want to hear more than dead air, maybe crack open the FCC database, quit whining about your tools, and start doing the damn work.

Oh my goodness.... Are you a ham. If not you may want to consider it.

The things that you are saying are almost the same as hams observe / discuss...
Some are appliance operators, some experimenters everyone has a different desire/need.

Eventually this will work it's way to other fields, some are drone operators, some are model airplane experimenters..

I assume this kind of thinking has gone on in the past...

People that don't assemble their own ELF II computer just aren't getting the understanding of the work that goes into computers and programming. The lazy just expect to use them and have everything done for them.

Some people just eat jelly, some preserve their own, some grow their own and preserve it themselves... If you are going to eat jelly you should put the work into it ! !

I hope everyone realizes this is in good fun.

 

[EAFrizzle]

Some people just eat jelly, some preserve their own, some grow their own and preserve it themselves... If you are going to eat jelly you should put the work into it ! !

Everyone should enjoy jellies, jams, preserves, and marmalade as often as possible.

Just not around your radios.


Trust me on this one.

 

[es93546]

Not only are very few people doing searches, if they do search they want free software to program their scanners. Never mind that software like ProScan programs so many different scanners (at least a dozen) old and new, it has superior logging features that make doing searches far more efficient. I don't have a mike on my computer so I can't record my searches or monitoring a business trunked radio system to identify talkgroups, but the software is capable of doing so. I have a relatively new computer so I can't afford to replace it with one that would record each log entry. ProScan costs $50, but the number and type of scanners is is compatible make that money very effective. Since computer programmable scanners have been available, I've purchased my software and not tried any of the free software figuring you get what you pay for. I guess if you aren't going to do any searches, you can just download the database and then call it good.

 

[MUTNAV]

Everyone should enjoy jellies, jams, preserves, and marmalade as often as possible.

Just not around your radios.


Trust me on this one.

A person doing that could call it research, a worthwhile endeavor for everyone. Although it sounds like your research didn't end well, I think confirming the results are important.

 

[Wilrobnson]

I referenced a video earlier in my rant, here it is.

I did not use a script or anything fancy, just downloaded some screen recorder and went freestyle (this was when the most popular topic on any forum was "wHeRe cAn i FiNd FcC UpDaTeS???"

I could've done a lot better, but it portrays the basic idea about doing the damn work.

(FTR I check for updates every few days)

 

[kc2asb]

I whole heartedly agree! Recently, my Samsung S9+ bit the dust, the battery swole (swelled?) cracking the case, and being an "android" kind of person, I got a Samsung S24. It was on sale at ATT. I've been getting used to it for several weeks now deleting google of all different kinds of ads, recommendations, and idiotic stuff I don't need or want. The damn thing picks up on anything I say, like if I say I need a new ceiling fan, it pops up (it won't as soon as I find the app that does that!).
To entertain myself, I place the phone near my scanners just to see what kind of idiocy pops up...

Google and its ads really are a pox on humanity. These devices are way too intrusive and give the illusion that things should just fall into our laps by simply uttering a "keyword".

Hopefully Uniden and Whistler don't come out with scanners with the attributes of "smart"phones, loaded with ads and listening to us as we listen to them.

 

[GM]

I will say on my end that I have been a contributor to RR as far back as when it was TrunkedRadio.net. However, one reason I had to stop "doing the work" (temporarily) is due to ever increasing work and family commitments. I know of a few members on here that used to contribute a lot of time and effort to make the database as accurate as possible (especially the NJ and NYC databases), but their free time has waned over the years due to what I stated above. Also for me, I have a tough time finding the licenses in the FCC database when they are across state lines (such as Simon Malls based in Indiana, but has properties all over the US) and then trying to find the specific license for the location in NJ. If I knew how to search the FCC database in a better fashion, I would be able to contribute even more to the database over the course of time since my work takes me all over the region where I'm located (NJ) and have access to radios in an "insider fashion" I guess you could say.

Also, I know it seems that it's the same 25-30 people are doing the work for the database, but at the same time, those are the people who are giving accurate information to the database. I didn't know what I was doing until I had a few mentors show me how the different programs ran, and also how systems work. With me, it started with @elk2370bruce who showed me back in 2002 how trunking worked on a Pro 93 analog scanner. Along the line after I got my BC250D digital trunking scanner and learned it, @robbinsj2 showed me how to use Unitrunker one evening at a local coffee shop. @robertpearsall showed me how to use ProCom96 and other programs for radio monitoring and to interpret the data from them. @lovescanner continues to text me what he hears on unknown talkgroups on various systems weekly and then we compare notes before I make a submission to the database. I will agree that we need the next generation to do the work that we do now, but maybe what we need are more mentors out there to show "the thrill of the chase," and how rewarding it can be, along with making new friends/connections along the way in the process.

 

[kc2asb]

I love my 436HP and I programmed it by hand. It took a while but it works just fine. Many scoffed and said why would I do it that way. Very simple, my old PC is pretty much toast and other that things I have in the files, I can't access the internet. My smart type phone suits me just fine so I'm in no hurry to replace to old PC at least not for awhile. Yes, just put it in search and see what comes up. You never know what interesting things will pop up. Plus, you can always confirm on here too.

I bought a 996T in 2007/2008 when my town went digital, and programmed it entirely by hand using the RR Database. That was probably my first visit to this site.

There was a definite learning curve, as I was accustomed to the old architecture of fixed banks/channels. The 996T was an entirely new beast. It was a bit of a chore at first, but the desire to hear my local FD/PD again was a strong motivator. I read the owners manual and got it done.

 

[CrabbyMilton]

I found a much easier owners manual for my 436 too and studied it before I received it. It's not that hard if you just take the time to follow instructions.

 

[trimmerj]

Everyone should enjoy jellies, jams, preserves, and marmalade as often as possible.

Just not around your radios.


Trust me on this one.

Or while you're driving.....

 

[themaninseat1a]

I’m very disheartened by OP’s post.

I fully respect that many longtime hobbyists have spent years building up their knowledge, logging systems by hand, and figuring things out without a computer to lean on. That dedication is incredible, and it’s part of what made this hobby so special in the first place. But it doesn’t mean newer tools or easier access make today’s hobbyists lazy—or the hobby any less rewarding.

Technology has changed, yes—but so has everything else. Modern scanners and SDRs don’t take the fun out of scanning; they open the door for more people to enter the hobby in the first place. When I plug in my zip code and hear local fire traffic I never knew existed, or hear a station that brings me back to my childhood on SDR, it sparks that same sense of discovery I imagine you all felt tuning the dial 30 years ago. It’s just a different path to the same magic.

To be honest, the tone of “just do the work” doesn’t feel very welcoming to those of us trying to learn. What might be second nature to a seasoned scanner veteran is often a mountain of acronyms, systems, and frequencies to climb for a beginner. If a modern scanner gives someone a foothold instead of falling off that mountain entirely, how is that a bad thing?

I’ve learned so much from this forum—and I’m thankful for the folks here who share their knowledge with kindness and patience. That’s the spirit I hope continues to thrive.

We need both: the old-school spirit of curiosity and tinkering, and the modern tools that make it possible for a new generation to join the fun.

Thanks for reading.

 

[buddrousa]

As an old school scanner person, I love the new technology but what I do not like is the people that will not read the manual search the forums and read the older post and then complain about things not working. Then you have the few that will even ask you to do it for them. Now we do have a few that will hand feed the needy I want you to do it for me. Some are too lazy to read the same thread they post in which already has the answer posted in it. We have a great area that explains Trunking, Repeaters, Simplex and Radio Formats all you have to do is read.
I have never minded helping a user, but I will not do it for you if you are not willing to help yourself.

 

[bob550]

Back in the Mesozoic Era, research was accomplished by walking to your local library and searching the card catalog files for the subject you were interested in. You actually had to work for the information. Now, everyone thinks they're living in the Matrix where all they have to do is plug in and download whatever they want. I say this as if I miss the "old days". I don't. I've been in this hobby for over 45 years. So while I can hold my own in communicating on this forum, I sometimes get the feeling that I'm a patient on a forum of medical research scientists. The poor schmuck who simply wants to have fun listening to his PD on a pre-programmed scanner is somehow frowned upon as less of a hobbyist than others. But the reality is that those folks are helping to keep this hobby alive and new scanners rolling off the shelves. Welcome them!

 

[ScanRafael]

I am willing to do the work. Two years ago I was stationed in Korea. I brought my BCD436HP with me of course and kept it in close call mode I discovered that there was a trunked radio system where I was because I got several hits in the 390-400Mhz range but heard nothing other than what sounded like data on the control channel. After I had compiled a list of what I believed to be all of the frequencies in the pool, I made a favorites list and put my scanner in ID Search mode. I spent a year there never received a single talk group. If I go back there, I want to try using an SDR software to find the frequencies and talk groups. I have never used an SDR software before. Which ones are best for finding systems that aren't yet in the RRDB?

 

[RaleighGuy]

I discovered that there was a trunked radio system where I was because I got several hits in the 390-400Mhz range but heard nothing other than what sounded like data on the control channel. After I had compiled a list of what I believed to be all of the frequencies in the pool, I made a favorites list and put my scanner in ID Search mode. I spent a year there never received a single talk group.

Are you sure it was a voice system and not a data system? Some systems may not be used for voice, but rather things like computer links (MDTs) or even paging. I don't know what you were hearing, just throwing that out there as a possibility.

If I go back there, I want to try using an SDR software to find the frequencies and talk groups. I have never used an SDR software before. Which ones are best for finding systems that aren't yet in the RRDB?

My favorite is DSD+ FL ($25 for life subscription, I think $15 for 1 year) and Unitrunker V2, but others swear by SDRTrunk and a few others.

 

[StoliRaz]

I’m very disheartened by OP’s post.

I fully respect that many longtime hobbyists have spent years building up their knowledge, logging systems by hand, and figuring things out without a computer to lean on. That dedication is incredible, and it’s part of what made this hobby so special in the first place. But it doesn’t mean newer tools or easier access make today’s hobbyists lazy—or the hobby any less rewarding.

Technology has changed, yes—but so has everything else. Modern scanners and SDRs don’t take the fun out of scanning; they open the door for more people to enter the hobby in the first place. When I plug in my zip code and hear local fire traffic I never knew existed, or hear a station that brings me back to my childhood on SDR, it sparks that same sense of discovery I imagine you all felt tuning the dial 30 years ago. It’s just a different path to the same magic.

To be honest, the tone of “just do the work” doesn’t feel very welcoming to those of us trying to learn. What might be second nature to a seasoned scanner veteran is often a mountain of acronyms, systems, and frequencies to climb for a beginner. If a modern scanner gives someone a foothold instead of falling off that mountain entirely, how is that a bad thing?

I’ve learned so much from this forum—and I’m thankful for the folks here who share their knowledge with kindness and patience. That’s the spirit I hope continues to thrive.

We need both: the old-school spirit of curiosity and tinkering, and the modern tools that make it possible for a new generation to join the fun.

Thanks for reading.

Add to this that noobs won't know HOW to do the work. Do they even know an FCC database exists much less how to use it to search?

I'll add my own takes to some points:

On radio programming:

I CAN program my 996T or 15X by hand, but WHY would I want to when I can program it quicker and easier on a computer? Not only that, programming on a computer saves a lot of wear and tear on the knobs and buttons of my radios, having to program some giant trunked systems into them over the years. In a pinch I could manually add a system into my 436hp, and I have, but again it is far more tedious to do than just hook it up to my PC and do it there.

On searching:

I used to do that all the time back in the 90s. Not so much anymore. The amount of information online coupled with the fact that more and more agencies are running encryption, or switching to unmonitorable LTE radios or just straight up cell phones instead of walkie talkies has really killed my passion to look for the needle in a haystack. It seems we're heavily subtracting, not adding, radio users anymore. It really is too disheartening. I just don't have much time to search anyways, so I spend my time listening to whatever is left to listen to locally. The few times I do search, I'm more looking for skip when conditions are ripe rather than anything around me.

Last thought- teenagers won't make phone calls or answer their cell phones. Do you think they'll get into Ham, 2 way radio or CB?

Teenagers no longer answer the phone: Is it a lack of manners or a new trend?

Teenagers can seem to have their phones glued to their hands—yet they won't answer them when they ring. This scenario, which is all too familiar to many parents, can seem absurd and frustrating, or even alarming to some.

phys.org

 

[ScanRafael]

Are you sure it was a voice system and not a data system?

Yes. The fire alarm would ring often in my building and I would receive close call alerts at the same time as I watched firefighters and MPs hit their PTT buttons.

 

[RaleighGuy]

Yes. The fire alarm would ring often in my building and I would receive close call alerts at the same time as I watched firefighters and MPs hit their PTT buttons.

Great job with the research, nice to see someone who continues in the searching of new frequencies and systems, rather than complaining something isn't in the database and asking others to find it. What you are doing is truly a declining art in the hobby.

 

[Wilrobnson]

Add to this that noobs won't know HOW to do the work. Do they even know an FCC database exists much less how to use it to search?

If one was curious, they could start with a simple Google search, with an inquiry like "how are radio frequencies assigned?" which would lead a person with curiosity down the FCC GenMen rabbit hole.

Most aren't, though. They buy an overpriced SDR clad in a case with a pretty display, maybe connect it to their computer to program (or more likely get suckered in by a dealer's "free programming for one county!" pitch, then, when they can't hear what they want to, find this site, buy a premium membership and ask "why can't I hear Blahblah PD?"