Provoice Scanning question (No Flames Please)

[STiMULi]

It was I while back, but I read a rumor that Provoice could be monitored with 2 scanners and a computer with the correct software.

Yes... I have done the search but I could only find bits and pieces of what I am looking for.

Has there been a primer that I am missing or did the rumor not pan out?

I have 2 PRO2006's and a laptop that is doing nothing at the moment. Am I able to succesfully monitor ProVoice with a setup near this?

Dan?

 

[crayon]

Somebody did boast about how he paid a kid to engineer a software ProVoice decoder, but as you can guess that was a bunch of crap.

 

[STiMULi]

Well?

Filler material...

 

[SCPD]

A few folks have done this (not me) - *ahem* - or so I've heard.

You need:

A used Provoice capable radio.
An EDACS trunk-tracking scanner.

Both radios must use the same final IF. Pipe the IF from the scanner into the final IF filter stage of the Provoice radio. There are so many things that can go wrong. Aside from breaking something while tearing into two radios: this won't work on EDACS enabled scanners that ignore digital calls; it won't work on ESK either.

The next stage up is to add an additional scanner and run xTrunker software that supports scanner control. The scanner donating IF to the ProVoice radio must support scanner control. That will get around ESK and consumer scanners ignoring digital.

That's THREE radios and a computer - just to do what one radio does normally.

That's what I call a "Franken-radio". If anyone has ever done this - you should hang a picutre of Boris Karloff over your setup.

 

[N_Jay]

Its easy (in theory)

You get a DVSI development board. (Should cost you no more than a few thousand dollars)
You build a GSMK decoder (Data slicer, as GSMK is not that tricky)
You pipe the data into the computer and start working on a program to capture and frame it. (Just a little software, and software is nothing but typing, so just get typing)
Once you figure out the frames, you start piping the payload data into the DVSI board, and play with the settings till you figure out just what parameters M/A-COM implemented.

When you get that working you go back to your decoder/framer program and start looking at the other data to find the FEC and other bits that might be useful.

Geeze, whats taking you so long?:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[rescue161]

I also read somewhere that someone used a Pro-96 to decode conventional Provoice.

If all you're looking to do is monitor, then just get an LPE-200 and be done with it.

 

[rdale]

rescue - never believe what you read on the Internet.

 

[DaveIN]

FrankenTrunker... I LOVE IT!!! +;-}

 

[rescue161]

rescue - never believe what you read on the Internet.

That's why I said to just buy an LPE-200.

 

[loumaag]

All off topic and flame war posts have been deleted. Get back on topic and no more name calling or this will be closed for good.

And what is the deal about opening up old threads just to start an argument?

 

[blantonl]

Gentleman, there is a wiki page on how to monitor EDACS ProVoice systems and EDACS ProVoice ESK Systems using a ProVoice radio programmed in conventional mode and etrunker:

http://wiki.radioreference.com/index.php/Digital_Voice_Conversion_Method

 

[rdale]

http://wiki.radioreference.com/index.php/Digital_Voice_Conversion_Method

 

[STiMULi]

There you go. That is on the right track!

That is one way that has not been posted in 3 months of asking.

Thanks Lindsay!

 

[N_Jay]

I think what confuses people is the mistaken belief that ProVoice is in any way a "secure" system.

It is NOT. It is simply a digital system that happens to use non-standard protocols.

The only thing that makes ProVoice had to scan is the lack of commonly available parts (hardware or software), and the lack of a sufficient market to entice a scanner manufacturer to build and sell a product.

 

[KE4ZNR]

Once again you miss the point
it is not a matter of IF it can be done...it is pretty dang easy to do...the question is are you (or anyone else) willing to be sued for all you own by the patent holders once you come up with a software/hardware solution? Because you can bet the people who own the patents to the technology are just not gonna let someone come up with a monitoring device without licensing the secrets from them
Marshall KE4ZNR

EDIT to add: I would be the first in line to purchase a solution if there would be one that would not voliate any patents...I have a Provoice system down the road from me I would love to be able to monitor easily without spending $$$ on a provoice radio...

right N Jay glad to somebody esle understands its not a secure system. all you need is the skills to create software which isnt hard to do. anybody with qualified skills could come up with this solution as we have done. i`m sure we arent the only ones that have done this.

 

[WayneH]

:roll: You people....

Thread requested to be closed so ... closed.

-W