Top Secret Frequencies!!!!!!!

[safetyobc]

Why are all of the agencies so "top secret" with their freqs. I understand that there are criminals who use the freqs to thier advantage, but come on. It is not like the freqs are unobtainable. I started scanning about 2 years ago and when I started with a BC80XLT 50 channel, finding freqs was very very difficult. I am a fulltime firefighter and still agencies wouldn't give me thier freqs. Even our PD. I had to run searches and spend countless hours on the web to find them. I am still finding new freqs (I guess that will continue) I was even instructed not to give out our (Fire) freq to anyone who asks for it. And trust me, there isn't a lot of info on freqs in rural Arkansas. RRDatabase is about the biggest collection that I know of on the web. Thank You to the creators and operators of this fine group. If not for RR it would be a lot of silent scanners in the world. Thanks.

 

[INDY72]

Some agencies are very very security minded,.. Others are well... not so restrictive....

What non federal agencies fail to realise is that the FCC data is open to ANYONE to search, and that its still legal to monitor most comms.

 

[safetyobc]

Exactly, I found a lot of my freqs on the FCC Database search. Some aren't always active but at least it was a start.

I did find out that if you call your local radio service dealer for info. They get kinda mad at you for asking for info. and then tell you ummmm NO.

 

[SAR923]

Go look at the mobile units. The types of antennas should give you a clue as to at least what band they are operating. Go to the agency at shift change. Either take the antenna off your portable or use the stubby RD race scanner antenna. Scan the band and you should hear them going 10-8 on the air. As long as they transmit on the air and don't use MDC's exclusively, you'll be able to figure out their frequencies.

Which is why this whole "Homeland Security Secret Frequencies" thing is such a crock. Any terrorist can do exactly what I described and have a departments whole frequency plan in a few days even if all references were removed from the Internet. Receivers like the Pro-83 make it so even radio dummies can do the same thing.

 

[safetyobc]

I now have all my local freqs. I work in the same building as the PD. They are on one end and the FD is on the other. We are dispatched by the same people. That was why I thought it was so stupid. I used my search to find the freqs.

I even had a cop tell me after the new high band system was installed that they had a "Private" channel and no one in "scanner land" would know the freq and couldn't listen in on them. I gave him one of those looks, like yeah. Anyway, the secret freq he was talking about was national law. funny huh. There are several officers who use nat law and talk like no one is listening. I think it is hilarious that these guys think this is some sort of private channel. Just about everyone with a scanner has nat law freqs in them. The radio shop put the freqs in for mutual aid with other cities, but these guys think they are there on private channel. Funny huh.

 

[oregontreehugger]

If you really want to scare them, mention something you heard in passing. :shock:

 

[astrodanco]

Which is why this whole "Homeland Security Secret Frequencies" thing is such a crock. Any terrorist can do exactly what I described and have a departments whole frequency plan in a few days even if all references were removed from the Internet. Receivers like the Pro-83 make it so even radio dummies can do the same thing.

Suicide bombers and the like don't care about any of that. Their plans are not in any way affected by police radio traffic. They have no interest in scanners.

 

[AZScanner]

Warren Arkansas huh?

http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&action=cfcc&xid=113&t=2

This tip works well for any searches you need: Just look up what county you are in and hit the FCC search page on this site. I recently found some new stuff for my area this way... namely the Gila River digital TRS. Will see if I can trunktrack from my house and log some talkgroups. I think I'm close enough, but if not a short road trip will fix that. :twisted:

-AZ

 

[safetyobc]

yeah I donated a lot of the freqs in bradley county to rr.

 

[JnglMassiv]

The truly spooky agencies doing the truly secret work don't use regular radios. There's some wild technology out there with specs you wouldn't believe.

Direct-sequency spread spectrum is one of the technology goodies these guys get to use. The efficiency is virtually off the charts with <100milliwatt radio outputs having 20+ mile range and signal strength (on a per hop basis) well below the noise floor. Naturally, there's usually COMSEC embedded. Not only can you not decrypt the signal, you don't even know its there!

 

[ThornyI]

I noticed they're on narrowband... do you just monitor 153.780, or do you have a scanner that will program 153.7775?

 

[N_Jay]

Direct-sequency spread spectrum is one of the technology goodies these guys get to use. The efficiency is virtually off the charts with <100milliwatt radio outputs having 20+ mile range and signal strength (on a per hop basis) well below the noise floor. Naturally, there's usually COMSEC embedded. Not only can you not decrypt the signal, you don't even know its there!

I think you are talking about link and not mobile/portatble equipment.

100 mw will have a whole lot of trouble going 20 miles no matter how wide you spread it.

 

[kellyannduffy]

HI - totally new to this - can someone help me ? What are tactical frequencies and how do I find them for the police/fire in my area? I am actually a reporter - and it is so frustrating to me when they switch to "tactical". I am not even sure what it means?

 

[JnglMassiv]

think you are talking about link and not mobile/portatble equipment.

100 mw will have a whole lot of trouble going 20 miles no matter how wide you spread it.

Nope, definitely not mistaken and not a typo. I said you wouldn't believe the specs.

From here:

If the channel capacity is the message you want to send and how fast you want to send it (in this case a single pulse sent about 434 times each second for abut 5 seconds and then about 5 seconds of silence, maybe 434 bits per second. The receiver bandwidth needs to be 150 kHz to get most of the transmitted signal, then the process gain is about 345. That means that a transmitter putting out 0.1 watts (just a guess for the black box based on 50 % efficiency, 22 ma from 9 Volts. Also the "factory" schematic shows 20 dBm as the output power.) will have an equivalent output power of > 34 watts! The signal actually covers a bandwidth greater than 200 kHz so maybe 35 Watts is closer.

These are for military search and rescue radios. Note they are powered by a 9 volt battery. Obviously, these would need to have huge range, low probability of detection, low power consumption, high immunity to jamming and security.

And just to put it in perspective, GPS satellites transmit on the order of 30W and are over 10000 miles out. Signal strength levels on the ground are on the order of -130dBm, well into typical background noise. Naturally, they use antenna tricks and the like but the same spread spectrum technology is used to extract precise data.

 

[Microwavemike]

GPS in the 1.8Ghz band is spread stectrum. Look at the path there800-1200 Km. That signal is down in the noise.
The mil guys have radios that you would not believe. The new thing now is software defined radios. They will scan the spectrum, and interface with what ever system they find. Sincgars, GSM, FDMA, TDMA, Tetra, P-25 ect.
Kind of like the new series of service monitors. Any mode, any frequency, internal comsec.
Looks like a software upgrade for the Lacrose series of spy sats.

mm

 

[N_Jay]

think you are talking about link and not mobile/portatble equipment.

100 mw will have a whole lot of trouble going 20 miles no matter how wide you spread it.

Nope, definitely not mistaken and not a typo. I said you wouldn't believe the specs.

From here:

If the channel capacity is the message you want to send and how fast you want to send it (in this case a single pulse sent about 434 times each second for abut 5 seconds and then about 5 seconds of silence, maybe 434 bits per second. The receiver bandwidth needs to be 150 kHz to get most of the transmitted signal, then the process gain is about 345. That means that a transmitter putting out 0.1 watts (just a guess for the black box based on 50 % efficiency, 22 ma from 9 Volts. Also the "factory" schematic shows 20 dBm as the output power.) will have an equivalent output power of > 34 watts! The signal actually covers a bandwidth greater than 200 kHz so maybe 35 Watts is closer.

These are for military search and rescue radios. Note they are powered by a 9 volt battery. Obviously, these would need to have huge range, low probability of detection, low power consumption, high immunity to jamming and security.

And just to put it in perspective, GPS satellites transmit on the order of 30W and are over 10000 miles out. Signal strength levels on the ground are on the order of -130dBm, well into typical background noise. Naturally, they use antenna tricks and the like but the same spread spectrum technology is used to extract precise data.

Well they are NOT sending voice at 434 bits per second!

And I don't see the refence to 20 miles (mobile/Portable to Base/Mobile/Portable).
I would guess we are talking about low data rate telemetry from ground to air. Probabaly 10 miles at the most (52,000 feet to a aircraft)

 

[safetyobc]

Yeah I have the narrow band freq put in. I can hear them just fine. I have an older scanner withouth narrowband capabilities and it works fine also it just rounds it up.

 

[n4voxgill]

HI - totally new to this - can someone help me ? What are tactical frequencies and how do I find them for the police/fire in my area? I am actually a reporter - and it is so frustrating to me when they switch to "tactical". I am not even sure what it means?

As a reporter you should remember WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE? well you forgot where. If you would state where you are, someone may be able to help.

 

[SAR923]

Which is why this whole "Homeland Security Secret Frequencies" thing is such a crock. Any terrorist can do exactly what I described and have a departments whole frequency plan in a few days even if all references were removed from the Internet. Receivers like the Pro-83 make it so even radio dummies can do the same thing.

Suicide bombers and the like don't care about any of that. Their plans are not in any way affected by police radio traffic. They have no interest in scanners.

Really? And you know this how? You do know that Terry Nichols had several scanners in his possesion when arrrested for the Oklahoma bombings, don't you? He had done several weeks of radio signals intelligence before the bombing so he knew the best time to get the truck nearest the front of the building, coincidentally just at shift change for the FPS.

I'm also pretty sure that the boys on 9/11 had more than a passing interest in aircraft radios and frequencies, especially since they knew how to turn off the transponders in the planes and knew how to monitor both the FAA and company radio channels based on their behavior.

You might also like to look up some information on Israeli radio security at checkpoints since suicide bombers there routinely use radios to montior checkpoint traffic so they inflict the maximum amount of deaths and injuries.

If you're going to post a sweeping statement, at least have some facts to back it up.

 

[JnglMassiv]

Probabaly 10 miles at the most (52,000 feet to a aircraft)

More likely to a satellite. A downed pilot in enemy territory (where he himself was just shot down) seldom has friendly jets slowly circling directly overhead listening until his SOS is heard. Even at a close 10 miles out and 52000 feet, that's already 14 miles away.

Its hard to write here about the modern gear used for the truly covert stuff. By many accounts, there are currently surveillence teams in Iran. One wouldn't expect their comm gear to have full specs and detailed technological data up on the web or otherwise available for forum and message board discussion. One can instead look at similar technology on the open market and extrapolate the desired figures.

Current implementations of wireless networking equipment (802.11B/G) that I'm sure many here on the forum are familiar with use direct sequence spread spectrum (DSSS). 100mW (20dBm) is a typical output power for wifi cards. A typical card is the Cisco Air-PCI 351. The manufacturer quotes a 2000ft foot outdoor range at 1Mbps.

Its not a perfect analogy for a number of reasons.
1. Note that this is without an external antenna which is only going to improve things.
2. Also note that this is for data 1Mbps. Voice would only require some small fraction of this amount of bit rate, especially with an efficient vocoding scheme and DSP (compression, filtering, etc).
3. Data being transfered by WiFi is extremely intolerant of bit errors..unlike voice.
4. WiFi data is limited to certain channels 22MHz wide. Government gear has no such limitations. This is important because the wider the bandwidth in a DSSS system for a given power, due to a property called process gain, the longer the range (with some limitations).
5. WiFi cards need to be competitively priced. Government equipment is famously exceedingly expensive. When it comes to intelligence gathering, cost is no object.

Take these considerations with the knowledge that the WiFi card is a common consumer product compared to a spooky government radio.
Compare any state of the art consumer product to a state of the art gov/military product (imaging satellites/performance jets/spacecraft/databases) and you can begin to imagine the possibilities.