NYPD Trunk?

[SCFDCOMM]

No. This has absolutely nothing to do with school

No. This has absolutely nothing to do with school safety.

okay, if you say so. This has been in the planning stages for quite some time now. Engineering meetings go back a year+

 

[SCFDCOMM]

The data stream is identical on all towers on a simulcast system. It can't be different or it would cause reception errors.

From what I have heard, third hand and unconfirmed, ESB may be only active site.

as of now you are correct

 

[718164878013]

As of 21:00 today, the 46/48 (Zone 13), 47/49 (Zone 14), 50/52 (Zone 15) have moved to the +PBBX encrypted zones. I’m wondering if there’s gonna be a TRS channel for them down the line.

 

[rr60]

TV 16 has been rolling in frequently as of late. I have watched numerous times, however not continuously. I have not seen the 483.xxx CC roll. Has anyone?

 

[pro106import]

TV 16 has been rolling in frequently as of late. I have watched numerous times, however not continuously. I have not seen the 483.xxx CC roll. Has anyone?

View attachment 168302

Yes the CC has stayed the same since Aug. 1st. The CC's on the NYCICN system haven't changed for at least a year, so it's not unusual it seems.

 

[K2NEC]

Regarding this system:
New York City Police Department (NYPD) Trunking System, New York City, New York

It appears that their TGID Scheme is rather simple and follows this channel layout almost to a T
CW1=301
SI CW1=302
CW2=303
...
Man 1/5/7=101
Man 6/9=102
...
Brx 40/41=110
Brx 42/44=111
...
Bkyn 60/61=116
Bkyn 62/68=117
...
Qns 100/101=127
Qns 102/106=128
etc.

Is this something worth submitting as an update or not because it's unconfirmed that's the actual traffic being passed on that TG? Seems like it's just incremental following the precinct number.

 

[k2hz]

Regarding this system:
New York City Police Department (NYPD) Trunking System, New York City, New York

It appears that their TGID Scheme is rather simple and follows this channel layout almost to a T
CW1=301
SI CW1=302
CW2=303
...
Man 1/5/7=101
Man 6/9=102
...
Brx 40/41=110
Brx 42/44=111
...
Bkyn 60/61=116
Bkyn 62/68=117
...
Qns 100/101=127
Qns 102/106=128
etc.

Is this something worth submitting as an update or not because it's unconfirmed that's the actual traffic being passed on that TG? Seems like it's just incremental following the precinct number.

Submissions should be based on confirmed information, not speculation.

 

[richee2000]

Has anyone heard any actual activity on this system within the last week?

 

[K2NEC]

Submissions should be based on confirmed information, not speculation.

So how do we know that 104 is MTS/17/MTM if it's encrypted? Would be pretty difficult to tell from strictly RIDs

 

[SCFDCOMM]

Has anyone heard any actual activity on this system within the last week?

yes

 

[richee2000]

yes

What talk groups have you heard activity on?

 

[k2hz]

So how do we know that 104 is MTS/17/MTM if it's encrypted? Would be pretty difficult to tell from strictly RIDs

The issue is that the system is still apparently in the buildout and testing phase and not in service. There is no reliable information about the actual intended use of the system or if traffic heard now is only for test purposes. If it was actually in service, activity on the encrypted TG could by matched with activity on the suspected associated UHF channel to confirm continued use.

There is a strong possibility, even when the system is actually in service, activity on any TG may be sporadic since it will be active only when a subscriber unit is affiliated regardless of activity on the associated UHF channel.

 

[K2NEC]

The issue is that the system is still apparently in the buildout and testing phase and not in service. There is no reliable information about the actual intended use of the system or if traffic heard now is only for test purposes. If it was actually in service, activity on the encrypted TG could by matched with activity on the suspected associated UHF channel to confirm continued use.

There is a strong possibility, even when the system is actually in service, activity on any TG may be sporadic since it will be active only when a subscriber unit is affiliated regardless of activity on the associated UHF channel.

If the P25t is simulcasted with UHF, sure. But if they are standalone or trunking is a replacement for conventional, there's no sure fire way to tell that this TG is being used for x purpose if it's encrypted unless someone personally verifies that info with a subscriber.

 

[ff026]

If the P25t is simulcasted with UHF, sure. But if they are standalone or trunking is a replacement for conventional, there's no sure fire way to tell that this TG is being used for x purpose if it's encrypted unless someone personally verifies that info with a subscriber.

Terrible logic.
This “test” system’s purpose in unknown.
The only way to figure out what is what, watch activity and see what it follows.
It the activity lines up with those commands then it’s probably true.
They are multicasting right now.
There are no “users” of it.
If the activity lines up then it’s probably true.
It’s not like they switch the whole division to an untested system and abandon the conventional system for 20-45 minutes at a time.
It’s not like you can just do that. Lots of planning takes place when a division is shut down.

 

[seagravebuff60]

Is this something worth submitting as an update or not because it's unconfirmed that's the actual traffic being passed on that TG? Seems like it's just incremental following the precinct number.

If the P25t is simulcasted with UHF, sure. But if they are standalone or trunking is a replacement for conventional, there's no sure fire way to tell that this TG is being used for x purpose if it's encrypted unless someone personally verifies that info with a subscriber.

That would be a terrible idea. As @k2hz points out, submissions should be based on confirmed information only and not speculation. The RR submission guidelines mention that:

We are interested in the following information that you have personally gathered and confirmed to be accurate, either on your own or as a group, but please keep in mind that we do not accept data drawn directly from the FCC database. You must personally verify that a frequency is in use before you submit it.

TG 104 was broadcasting in the clear for this system before it went encrypted.

Most of the TGs are multicasted with their respective UHF conventional counterpart, so it's just a matter of waiting and listening for traffic.

 

[GTR8000]

And of course, sometimes we have sources who provide info that is not readily available to the general public. Just because you can't hear it, doesn't mean that someone else can't and/or doesn't know what it is. I'm not saying that's the case with this specific system, but it's fairly common.

Anyway, yeah, we don't accept submissions based on guessing or speculation.

 

[DaveNF2G]

So how do we know that 104 is MTS/17/MTM if it's encrypted? Would be pretty difficult to tell from strictly RIDs

Following known RIDs is the best way to identify encrypted talkgroups.

 

[k2hz]

Following known RIDs is the best way to identify encrypted talkgroups.

How would any RIDs be known since this is a new system if it totally encrypted?

 

[brndnstffrd]

Regarding this system:
New York City Police Department (NYPD) Trunking System, New York City, New York

It appears that their TGID Scheme is rather simple and follows this channel layout almost to a T
CW1=301
SI CW1=302
CW2=303
...
Man 1/5/7=101
Man 6/9=102
...
Brx 40/41=110
Brx 42/44=111
...
Bkyn 60/61=116
Bkyn 62/68=117
...
Qns 100/101=127
Qns 102/106=128
etc.

Is this something worth submitting as an update or not because it's unconfirmed that's the actual traffic being passed on that TG? Seems like it's just incremental following the precinct number.

A good place for unconfirmed, but potential info to be posted is in the wiki. Not sure if there is one for this system yet, but since submissions are intended to be confirmed information only, I find the wikis are a good place to share and crowdsource info such as this until it is confirmed accurate.

 

[DaveNF2G]

How would any RIDs be known since this is a new system if it totally encrypted?

They wouldn't. On systems that are partially encrypted, or part-time encrypted, my comment stands. However, one of the previous posters said that the talkgroup was previously in the clear, so there was an opportunity to identify RIDs before encryption.