San Joaquin Sheriff

Status
Not open for further replies.

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
Hey guys, I noticed on the database that the Sheriff department in San Joaquin is changing up their frequencies a little bit. I reprogrammed my radio accordingly. Well I'm starting to notice that on dispatch and the other tac channels I am hearing only static...which gives me a scare that they possibly went encrypted...can anyone confirm this? There could be a chance that I'm probably in a crappy area to get decent reception...its happened before but usually I would hear part of a conversation then some kind of buffer delay. This time, its just static, but if there's encryption I would usually hear crazy digital noise but I don't. Ironically, the only sheriff channel that I can hear perfectly is the records channel, I can listen to it all day perfectly. If anyone has any insight on this, please elaborate, thanks all!
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,704
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
460 MHz UHF

I hear the records channel 24/7. I usually only hear the other channels after the sun goes down, since they are on 460 MHz UHF. However, I pick up the Marysville Yuba City area channels 24/7 and they share some of the same frequencies. Marysville Yuba City is analog while San Joaquin Stockton are digital.

So, it depends on WHERE you are. You might be picking up other agencies on 460 UHF on the same frequencies. You really can't tell for sure what SJ is doing unless you're in their grade A area.
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
The ones that say pending are just that. Pending. The other freqs listed are active and not encrypted.

Hey guys, I noticed on the database that the Sheriff department in San Joaquin is changing up their frequencies a little bit. I reprogrammed my radio accordingly. Well I'm starting to notice that on dispatch and the other tac channels I am hearing only static...which gives me a scare that they possibly went encrypted...can anyone confirm this? There could be a chance that I'm probably in a crappy area to get decent reception...its happened before but usually I would hear part of a conversation then some kind of buffer delay. This time, its just static, but if there's encryption I would usually hear crazy digital noise but I don't. Ironically, the only sheriff channel that I can hear perfectly is the records channel, I can listen to it all day perfectly. If anyone has any insight on this, please elaborate, thanks all!
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
The changes being made are simulcasting all three main channels. Channel 2 is currently not simulcast that's why you hear it so well. Once the pending changes are made permanent (should be very soon) Channel 2 will sound like ggarbage just like channel 1 does :)
 

russianspd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
359
I used to have troubles getting SO to work for me. Channel 2 worked all the time. Channel 1 was always touch and go. Location and location of the radio also makes a difference. If I move it 3 inches from where I get a signal everything falls apart and I get broken and intermittent disruptions. Certainly is a balancing act finding a good spot where everything you want to hear comes in reasonably well.

FYI, I'm listening inside. I don't have an external antenna.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
Thank you all for filling me in. quick question for you all though, At the moment I have my digital modulator set for C4M, for my XTS4K, I do have an option to set it to CQPSK and wide also. Im reading from others that I may want to switch to CQPSK mode instead, especially simucast for better audio quality..true or false? maybe this might help me be able to hear SO better?

Also from what I read, CQPSK is backwards compatible with C4M true or false? any ideas on this guys?

With the mindset of thinking CQPSK is backwards compatible, I may as well switch all my conventional personalities to CQPSK....at least the narrowband frequencies. can anyone give me ups and downs to this?

@ RussianSPD, I am also usually listening inside, a month ago I had no issues listening to all the SO and SPD traffic, on occasion I will transmit to the ham repeater inside my house from stockton to Mt Oso, actually kind of works if its an emergency situation.
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
I used to have troubles getting SO to work for me. Channel 2 worked all the time. Channel 1 was always touch and go.
The reason for that is likely because channel 1 is simulcast and channel 2 isn't. Soon you will have the same issue with channel 2 when the switch is made unfortunately.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
hey KMA371 if I switched to CQPSK instead of C4M, do you think I will have any issues receiving? I'm in the middle of reprogramming the personalities on my radio as we speak. Ill give you guys a heads up if it works out
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
Hey guys, Just changed the preference on my modulation from C4M to CQPSK, it seems to help me pick up So main dispatch, not quite as good as I wanted, but at least its picking up on the radio now. I'm sure if I was outside, I would be able to hear a full conversation instead.
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
hey KMA371 if I switched to CQPSK instead of C4M, do you think I will have any issues receiving? I'm in the middle of reprogramming the personalities on my radio as we speak. Ill give you guys a heads up if it works out
Changing the encryption mode shouldn't make a difference since they aren't using encryption, but I'm not expert on the matter.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
kma371, I was referring to digital modulation type not encryption. I switched it to CQPSK mode instead of the default C4M modulation, I can now hear radio traffic from SO almost perfectly from inside my house now. Worked out better than I thought
 

russianspd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
359
The reason for that is likely because channel 1 is simulcast and channel 2 isn't. Soon you will have the same issue with channel 2 when the switch is made unfortunately.
Having the radio set in certain "hot spots" in my house/room gets rid of the simulcast issues. Overall it has been miles better than when they were first initially changing over to digital. What was the reason for simulcasting as opposed to having a setup like SPD?
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
Having the radio set in certain "hot spots" in my house/room gets rid of the simulcast issues. Overall it has been miles better than when they were first initially changing over to digital. What was the reason for simulcasting as opposed to having a setup like SPD?
Delta wireless probably told them it was better to make a few extra bucks.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
I wouldn't doubt it, I found one of the county plans on the SJGOV website with their progress and game plan on switching to P25 and so on, it was an interesting read. If you can switch your demodulator to CQPSK, do it, it really helped me pick up SO nice and clean again. Im suspecting main dispatch is on simucast now too, because I am now able to pick them up again using CQPSK
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,205
I wouldn't doubt it, I found one of the county plans on the SJGOV website with their progress and game plan on switching to P25 and so on, it was an interesting read. If you can switch your demodulator to CQPSK, do it, it really helped me pick up SO nice and clean again. Im suspecting main dispatch is on simucast now too, because I am now able to pick them up again using CQPSK
The plan is to go to a county wide trunked system in the near future. How near that is, I don't exactly know, but I do know controllers have been purchased.

Most scanners don't have option to change the P25 modulation, so I'm assuming you programmed the frequency into your commercial radio so PLEASE be careful that you don't key up on their frequency accidentally. I'm sure you already know and understand the legal ramifications. Thanks.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
Yeah I read the part where the want to go trunk. From what I read they want to start with lodi. Who knows when they will start that process. It kind of sucks that they are going trunked, but on the flip side I i was able to figure out how to monitor trunked networks without affiliation or the requirment of using a system key to access the trunked personality, everything is done through conventional receive only personalities. So far it works good for the P25 trunked network near by, I have to start logging in the talkgroups that come through it. I just hope that when the county does switch to full trunked network that they dont go encrypted like manteca.

As far as changing P25 modulation on scanners, you are correct, the manufacturers have not caught up wth the demand yet as far as CQPSK, theres not a wide range of networks that use them yet to justify adding it, but i hear there could be firmware updates for some scanners.

I am using a commercial radio for monitoring, no worries I set them to receive only personalities, the only ones I dont are the ham repeaters in the area.
 

russianspd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
359
I can imagine in the future for the trunked system that Manteca would be the only encrypted users. I could see them paying the installer to encrypt their channels assuming it isn't an already available option from purchasing the system initially. Althought, it may temp the other departments to take advantage of it as well.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
Yeah, I bet Manteca would stick to encryption too as long as they have the funding to keep it that way. I hope it doesn't make other PD want to encrypt, I like the transparency, and to hear the good guys doing a good job finding the bad guy, It gives me a new good opinion about the PD for me personally. If anything needs to be encrypted, it would should just be the records channel, I hear wayyyy too much personal info get thrown out in the air, I guess the MDT goes down sometimes though
 

russianspd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
359
When I visited Southern California (Burbank) last year the majority of the departments had their records channels encrypted. Some even had almost all their channel encrypted as well. Records being encrypted as well along with particular tac channels makes sense. On the flip side I've heard some telling info given out over Dispatch quite often as well.
 

saberthree

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
34
It makes sense to encrypt the sensitive channels like records and the tac channels, Im still in debate about main dispatch being encrypted or not. I would like transparency , but we both know bad guys love taking advantage of it. I myself, love hearing the PD doing their jobs, and catching the bad guys. It makes me feel safer that we have a proactive police force. BTW, I think you and I may have met before if you ever went to the rifle range in linden...I used to be the range master there...I was the asian range master
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top