Stafford Questions

[Dafe1er]

Is there anyone scanning the Stafford Sheriff Department?

I had a new TGID show up today as 4504 and it is not listed in the DB. It showed no UID or had any audio (encryption?) but stayed active for a few minutes. The dispatch channel (4501) does this all the time and it is listed as encrypted in the RR. When the dispatch channel is active it does not show UID's either.

Also, the Coordination (4505) channel was active but had no audio either. It shows D for digital in the RR but does not show the E for encryption like the other channels on the system do. It did show a UID that was talking but did not catch it in time.

Only thing I get audio wise from Stafford is the Fire Dispatch channel.

I have a constant 4-5 bars and using a BCD436HP scanner with a Comet SMA3 antenna on it. I had thought we would be able to get UID's even if the audio did not come through while searching these systems?

What am I missing here? And do you think all of Stafford is going to be or is encrypted?

Thanks.

 

[fredva]

My understanding is that Stafford Sheriff's department has been fully encrypted on the P25 system from day one. But you should be able to receive virtually all of the fire and EMS talkgroups, including incident channels. The one exception I can think of is the ambulance to hospital talkgroup.

 

[kc4jgc]

My understanding is that Stafford Sheriff's department has been fully encrypted on the P25 system from day one. But you should be able to receive virtually all of the fire and EMS talkgroups, including incident channels. The one exception I can think of is the ambulance to hospital talkgroup.

That's been my experience as well, Dale.

 

[Dafe1er]

Thanks guy's.

I receive the Fire channels (very clear might I ad) and that is what got me to notice the new TGID for the Sheriff Dept. I was watching the screen during a fire transmission and when they were done the scanner went into scan mode and stopped on the Sheriff's Department. It had no audio and was showing an unknown TGID of 4504.

So, I played around yesterday doing a little testing.

I set my 436 next to the HP-1 to compare what I am getting.

The HP-1 of course does not stop on any TG that is encrypted. Weather you are doing a FL scan or a Trunking Discovery scan.

The 436 while scanning a FL with ID Search set to ON stops on the encrypted TG's and shows only the TGID. NO UID or RID. I did however get to playing with the 436 and each time the TGID of 4504 showed I pushed the "enter" button. In doing that I was able to log two different UID or RID's. One was: 3345580 and the other was: 10005.

I set the 436 to do a Trunking Discovery and the unit never once showed a hit for the new TGID or even stored it in the file. I watch the TGID of 4504 show up like 15 times in the Discovery mode and it never once logged it. Which I find strange. How are we to log these channels even if they are encrypted?

The TGID of 4504 is a very active channel and I would think falls under the Sheriff's office since it is the same numbering as the rest (4501, 4503 etc..) I am thinking it might be a secondary for Dispatch but will never know as long as it is encrypted.

 

[dtscho]

I believe that 4504 may be a secondary dispatch channel, such as when Stafford splits dispatch between north and south. Of course, there's no way of knowing for sure, since pretty much all the Sheriff is encrypted. 4505 is one of the few channels that's not encrypted, since it's used for interop.

The 436 doesn't display radio IDs for encrypted talkgroups, unfortunately. This is something that could definitely be changed in a firmware update.

Dave

 

[Dafe1er]

I believe that 4504 may be a secondary dispatch channel, such as when Stafford splits dispatch between north and south. Of course, there's no way of knowing for sure, since pretty much all the Sheriff is encrypted. 4505 is one of the few channels that's not encrypted, since it's used for interop.

The 436 doesn't display radio IDs for encrypted talkgroups, unfortunately. This is something that could definitely be changed in a firmware update.

Dave

I am positive it can be change in the FW also. I have the work around for now.

During the Trunking Discovery of the system it does not log the encrypted channels at all. I cannot find anything "new" unless I use a FL.

So, I have a FL called Stafford and have all listed RR files loaded into it with the ID search set to ON for the system, scan and see the unknown TGID show up. I hit the enter button when a new one shows up and store it in the scanner. While this new TG appears there is no RID/ UID displayed. I wait until just as the new Tg shows up on screen and hit the enter button and have three options there. One is to save the new UID. I select that and store it in the scanner. Then later after doing this I read the scanner and go through the new found items.

Here is what I have found so far. I do not know if you want to add them to the DB or not seeings how you are our Admin? Either way, I will be monitoring Stafford for new TG's & ID's.

TGID:
4504, 4526, 4508, 4513, 4506

UID's:
3213210
3213213
3344520
3345580
3345580
10005
10003

 

[dtscho]

Well, we know those talkgroups are probably Sheriff, but since we don't have anything more specific on them, I'm going to have to hold off on adding them to the database for now.

Unit IDs go to the Wiki (which anyone can edit, not just DB admins).

Dave

 

[brownlab]

Boy, I want to rant about why Stafford SO is still encrypted but better not...........LOL

 

[Dafe1er]

Well, we know those talkgroups are probably Sheriff, but since we don't have anything more specific on them, I'm going to have to hold off on adding them to the database for now.

Unit IDs go to the Wiki (which anyone can edit, not just DB admins).

Dave

Could we list the TGID under the Sheriff for now since it in the same number sequence and like you said most likely is the sheriff channels and list the channel name as unknown? I have seen this done on a system or two in the DB. They are very active channels. I will also try the wiki update sometime soon. Never done one.

Boy, I want to rant about why Stafford SO is still encrypted but better not...........LOL

Please feel free, I do not mind since I started a Stafford thread anyways. It would be on topic to me....lol

 

[dtscho]

Could we list the TGID under the Sheriff for now since it in the same number sequence and like you said most likely is the sheriff channels and list the channel name as unknown? I have seen this done on a system or two in the DB. They are very active channels. I will also try the wiki update sometime soon. Never done one.

I know some of the systems are done like that, but I don't think it's really supposed to be done. See pages 7 and 9 of the RR DB Admin Handbook:

http://wiki.radioreference.com/imag...e.com_Database_Administrator_Handbook_1.6.pdf

Dave

 

[fredva]

I guess I'm missing something here - would there be much benefit to having it in the database anyway, if nobody with a scanner can monitor it?

 

[Dafe1er]

I guess I'm missing something here - would there be much benefit to having it in the database anyway, if nobody with a scanner can monitor it?

If they happen to go Phase 2 and not use encryption it would be useful.Or if they have transmissions that happen to go clear. Besides, is this not what the hobby is about? I like finding new things and sharing them with others.

 

[fredva]

If they happen to go Phase 2 and not use encryption it would be useful.Or if they have transmissions that happen to go clear. Besides, is this not what the hobby is about? I like finding new things and sharing them with others.

Understood. However, IMHO, Stafford would be the last county I would expect to roll back encryption.

 

[brownlab]

If anybody runs against the current Stafford County Sheriff, they may want to ask him why he has gone to the expense of encrypting (or blocking) radio transmissions from the press and citizens of Stafford County? After all none of the surrounding counties feel there has been a need to go to such extremes and yet.. they have avoided any major crime waves. “Police officer safety” is often used as an answer to this question yet there is no proof that getting rid of police scanners keeps cops any safer on the street. (Hey, let get rid of cell phones too) If anything encryption hurts interoperability with neighboring counties and the State Police. I am all for encryption of special operations but traffic stops on US 17 and barking dog complaints? What is this guy protecting the people of Stafford from anyhow?

 

[Dafe1er]

If anybody runs against the current Stafford County Sheriff, they may want to ask him why he has gone to the expense of encrypting (or blocking) radio transmissions from the press and citizens of Stafford County? After all none of the surrounding counties feel there has been a need to go to such extremes and yet.. they have avoided any major crime waves. “Police officer safety” is often used as an answer to this question yet there is no proof that getting rid of police scanners keeps cops any safer on the street. (Hey, let get rid of cell phones too) If anything encryption hurts interoperability with neighboring counties and the State Police. I am all for encryption of special operations but traffic stops on US 17 and barking dog complaints? What is this guy protecting the people of Stafford from anyhow?

Your correct.
How many people would like to hear them operate on the SWAT channels? Ton's!!

But, we all know that it just makes more sense to encrypt them and leave open the Dispatch channels. If they have issues with "Criminal's" using scanners in crimes, then ram it right up their keyster. They seem to do it to select people for far worse crimes! Besides, what is an extra charge these days when people walk away with 25-30 charges at a time in some cases?

When I moved to this area from Illinois, I never heard of a department encrypting communications. I always heard things in the open in the City and if it had some sort of encryption I never new or cared.

I had heard just after moving here that Stafford was the first place that started using it in the area. I also heard other not so nice things about their town Sheriff's and department as a whole. I personally never had any issues with them but, I have always wondered what they have to hide for using the encryption.

With more Counties around me that bought the CrapTRBo getting funds together to now go to the P25 systems I worry if they are just going to say screw it and encrypt everything or be smart and make interoperability their priority and leave them open.

We shall see.

 

[Ghstwolf62]

Heck they get so worried about anyone hearing them they screw themselves out here. You'll hear a unit rolling code to something and a bunch of units jumping on the air asking "What's he got?" because they didn't put it out over the air.

I agree with you completely and can only hope agencies turn around from this direction. It only hurts them in the long run I think.