Unknown TG IDs in trunked records

[DaveH]

I know it's frustrating to look at a trunked system listing to find a bunch
of "unknown" or "unid" or whatever talkgroups. I believe it is now policy
to not have these, and I've noticed them being removed. However it's
also puzzling to look at a listing with aboslutely no TG information and
wonder if it's active, or nobody's interested in gathering info for it, or it's
hard to ID the users (which I frequently find).

Listing unknown TGs could give an idea how active the system is, what the
general (or specific) types or traffic are, and encourage those who might
want to help ID users that there are others actually working on it.
Otherwise, there is no good way to share this intermediate data without
specific discussion threads, which can be missed. Everyone has to
independently gather the same info until it is positively ID'ed, which is
redundant. Also, some interesting but not too often used TGs might go
unnoticed by some people. It would be much easier for people to program
the unknown TGs and search in that mode, and scan in "open" mode to
find new ones.

For LTR systems, knowing which groups are active can help identify the
Home Repeater numbers in the system. The PRO-92/2067 allow unordered
scanning but eventually the HR order is needed for other scanners.

A single table per system for "Unidentifed Talkgroups"is suggested.

Dave

 

[ECPD279]

I second this notion. I have many systems I could list with lots of unidentified talkgroups. Some are rarely used and not readily identifiable, and on some I have info based upon things I've heard on the TG, while I'm not entirely sure what they're for. It makes sense to not list TG's that one can't verify are active, i.e. you get one hit on T4Win or LTRunk but never see or hear it again, but if it can be verified that there is activity and it simply hasn't been identified why not list it in the DB.

Further, I have several LTR systems in which I know from LTRunk that the system has an LCN occupied, but I don't know the freq for that LCN. It'd be nice to occupy the LCN slot with xxx.xxxx so it is known that that LCN is active.

Thanks to DaveH for posting this, I've been mulling it over for awhile but I never think to bring it up.

 

[DaveH]

Well Sid, looks like our point didn't get a whole lot of attention. I hoped
that at least one of the admins would have commented.

My follow-on question is...what constitutes an "identified" talkgroup?

If I submit a TG with description "unknown" or "UNID" or some such,
chances are it will get bounced. The Database has numerous records with
TG descriptions such as "Towing Company" or "Contractor" etc. To me,
these are generic classifications, but a positive ID is the "proper" name of
the firm or agency using it. I don't think it would be productive to go and
remove all of these, but I'm looking for consistancy.

Around where I live, there's a firm whose proper name is Waste
Management. If someone enters a similar generic description that
has nothing to do with them, especially capitalized as many are, there
will be confusion. This can be extended to other cases. I suggest if these
generic names are accepted or retained, they be lower-case or in
parentheses to distinguish them from fully-IDed TGs.

Identifying a general user category might take 5-10 minutes, but the
actual user ID may take days to years. Take commercial Moto System 462f,
on which I've logged 88 TGs on 4 sites (there could be more). I've tried
recording whole days of activity (much of it pretty mundane..) without a
positive ID. TG attrition means that whatever I'd may have gathered a few
years back is likely no longer good. But there is not a single TG listed! Sadly,
this says a lot about (dis)interest in info-gathering, the hard way, on
commercial systems. That aside, give me a week, and I could fill in easily
half (or more) of them generically. And that goes for other similar systems.

This database could be an all-or-nothing entity, depending mostly on who has
inside-info; or it could be a tool to help people identify users, by (say) listing
them in a separate table, then "moving them over" as they get IDed.

Dave

 

[WayneH]

My way of doing things is if it's a little or new system and there's barely anything IDed then I'll allow some unknowns (as I agree with you all), but when the system has at least 50-100 well documented talkgroups unknowns get tossed.

-Wayne

 

[unitcharlie]

Otherwise, there is no good way to share this intermediate data without
specific discussion threads, which can be missed. Everyone has to
independently gather the same info until it is positively ID'ed, which is
redundant. Also, some interesting but not too often used TGs might go
unnoticed by some people. It would be much easier for people to program
the unknown TGs and search in that mode, and scan in "open" mode to
find new ones.

I absolutely agree.... the Scott County (KY) TRS is a new EDACS system, originally with only three working TG's all for the city pd.... then, as they were testing, TG's popped up without obvious uses, but using Dave's method they were ID'ed... I found a new TG (in the Lexington Public Safety TRS) last week that is used once a day for about ten minutes (a radio net test) and would only be active if it was used to issue a wx or other type of warning...although I would know what the warning involved (because of my job), I might have missed the particulars because it wasn't in my closed mode bank for that system....

It seems the folks who manage the data base know their submitters well enough to allow UNID'ed TGs so long as there is some kind of minimum criteria established.... I found the UNID'ed TG's very helpful when I started back into scanning a few years ago....

 

[mciupa]

This database could be an all-or-nothing entity... or it could be a tool to help people identify users, by listing them in a separate table, then "moving them over" as they get IDed.
Dave

Hopefully the latter idea is worthy of consideration. It would be fun to
play talk-group detective and nail down those elusive ? and unknowns .

Now you have to hunt & peck through systems to find unknowns.
But ,perhaps people would browse the unknown table and give it a shot as maybe their schedules allow them to be off during peak radio usage times.

I applaud anybody who has taken the time to grade and pave the road, so that we can drive on it.
Thanks Dave for your efforts.

 

[ILbandit]

Hopefully the latter idea is worthy of consideration. It would be fun to
play talk-group detective and nail down those elusive ? and unknowns .

Glad someone brought this up also, I'm currently have 12 TG's on a local system that aren't identified. They are all fairly active, and I'm trying to listen enough to give them a positive ID.
I've figured out what "type" of company is using about half of them, but can't get a positive name for them.

 

[Starcom21]

I agree totally that unidentified ID's need to be in the database.

Now, to help people out, maybe we need a place in the RRWiki or somewhere to post/add notes to what everyone has been hearing... to try to help identify them?

On the same subject, I think all unidentified (conventional) frequencies should be in the database - how else is half the people going to know they are even out there? A lot of people do not spend time searching the FCC database for new frequencies or other ones not listed. But these people are willing to put them in and monitor them - then we will know what they are

Maybe there could be an option that would not show UNID freq if you have chosen to mask them.

 

[ericcarlson]

I agree totally that unidentified ID's need to be in the database.

Lindsay has made very clear that the policy of this site is to not post unidentified talkgroups or freqs. Posting unidentified talkgroups is silly because of the nature of a trunked system: talkgroups can be added and removed continuously. I highly suggest monitoring all trunked systems in "ID search" mode and locking-out uninteresting talkgroups because you never know when new talkgroups will show up.

Now, to help people out, maybe we need a place in the RRWiki or somewhere to post/add notes to what everyone has been hearing... to try to help identify them?

The place to discuss unidentified talkgroups and freqs is in the appropriate region forum.

On the same subject, I think all unidentified (conventional) frequencies should be in the database - how else is half the people going to know they are even out there?

There is an "unidentified" and "all" freqs links on each county page already. (Although the "unidentified" link only shows up after an admin assigns FCC entities to the county.)

-Eric

 

[DaveH]

Fair enough Eric, most of us know that policy exists, but sometimes reasoned
arguments can be made where people might rethink, and possibly change things,
often for the better. I guess it depends on whether RR wants only to take
perfectly-determined data; or allow some less-precise, in a controlled manner,
such as to help in the identification process and ultimately make the DB better.

I doubt whether forums is actually a good way of exchanging data on
unknown talkgroups. It ends up scattered over multiple threads of multiple
forums, instead of in one place.

As for TGs coming and going, yes there is a certain amount of this. I
would suggest submitters refrain from a whole bunch of little updates
unless there is something really interesting. Special-event TGs would
fall into this, though unfortunately the turn-around on updates makes it
impossible for some events that last a day or less. I also recommend
that short-term TGs be accepted after the fact and kept for a certain
time, to remind people next time where to look for the same event, or
other similar events.

I'm not big on my own personal databases so have become more reliant on
the TRSDB. One VHF system 80 miles away I can barely hear with a
rooftop antenna and cavity filter, one channel at a time. Recently, the
"unknown" TGs I had managed to scrape together were "scrubbed".
Fortunately they are listed somewhere in my "black book". I guess
I won't make that mistake again.

Perhaps as an admin you are concerned about all of a sudden being
bombarded with a bunch of unidentified TGs. This is why I suggest they should
at least be narrowed down to a particular type of use, before being accepted,
and segregated into their own table.

I think I need to ask the question again. Is something (say) called "towing
company" or "landscaper" considered " identified"? There are certainly a lot
of them still in the database.

When I've suggested changes to Lindsay, he's usually been pretty responsive.
Right now I understand he's rather busy with normal life things, and I'd rather
not bug him about this.

Dave

 

[ericcarlson]

I think I need to ask the question again. Is something (say) called "towing company" or "landscaper" considered " identified"? There are certainly a lot of them still in the database.

Yes, they are considered identified. It's not very realistic to expect people to be able to identify exact business users on an SMR. Likewise, "police" is identified even though the freq or talkgroup might really be designated "Police District 6 Special Assignment Team" -- the point of the site policy is that we want something meaningful for the description. The policy is a result of the proliferation of talkgroups in the database that were labeled "unid" with no further annotation.

-Eric

 

[loumaag]

Eric puts forth the policy quite well. And of course we will accept submissions, as he says, with a minimum explanation. Of course, more is better.

[rant]
Now since we seem to have some interest in this area, let me tell you one of the things that we as admins don't like to do. That is reading through a forum and finding that some users are putting information in the fourm that should be submitted to the database. It is not the admin's job to cul through the fourms looking for data that should have been submitted. This is not the general rule, but there are pockets of people who do just that, Louisiana comes to mind right away. It is generally accepted in the scanning community, that this site is one of the best on the net for information in regard to scanning. Well it gets that way becuase of the users. People who hoard information or use this site as a way of contacting people to trade info off-list .... Okay I was about to say something I was going to be sorry for later. But if you have a brain and can read, I think you know where I was going with that. [/rant]

 

[mwjones]

While I think that a large number of Unidentifieds does distract from the legitaimate purpose of the site, I think the worse offenders are the ones that list the same unidentified talk groups for an extended period of time.

That said, let me throw a sugestion into the ring. If I as a user was to post a list to Eric (since he is the admin for Houston) that I had a list of Unidentified Talk Groups on the EDACS system I monitor, then why couldn't they be listed in the database as "01-001 Unidentified - 04/24/2005". After 60 or 90 days, an admin could, upon the next update to the system, pull the Unidentifed back out if they haven't been identified by then.

I use this system in the databases I maintain, as users come and go, I mark them that way, and can search the field for the dates.

The second idea would be to have a topic in each state/regional forum for those unidentifeds on the system, and to link to that topic from the individual trunked pages. In that forum, the admin can remind participants that they need to submit a change to the RR database once they have identified a TG.

My $.02 on this subject.

Mike Jones
Heights, Houston, Texas

 

[wa8pyr]

Eric puts forth the policy quite well. And of course we will accept submissions, as he says, with a minimum explanation. Of course, more is better.

[rant]
Now since we seem to have some interest in this area, let me tell you one of the things that we as admins don't like to do. That is reading through a forum and finding that some users are putting information in the fourm that should be submitted to the database. It is not the admin's job to cul through the fourms looking for data that should have been submitted. [/rant]

I'll second Lou's rant. Several times while surfing the forums (forii?) I've found good stuff that was posted in a forum but not submitted. Very annoying.

Folks, if you have information that's worthy of posting in a forum, it's likely worth submitting to the database as well. In a rare case it might not get used (for a variety of reasons), but likely will be.

Soapbox mode off.

Tom WA8PYR

 

[DaveH]

Gentlemen,

Those people who discuss specific TG info in the forums but don't post
to the database are not likely to be persuaded by one or two rants, or even
a whole bunch; but I guess it feels good anyway... I do one from time to time
myself. I maintain that the best way to communicate the info may be through
the DB itself as I suggested.

That aside, the reason commercial trunked systems don't get updated
in my area by more than one person (who can't be expected to do
everything) is a sad case of disinterest.

Dave

 

[mciupa]

So what it boils down to is maintaining the status quo, which is fine.

Those of us who have time and are keen on solving these puzzles will do
so.

 

[cdenton]

Unknown TG IDs

I'm in - I've tried posting unknown TG IDs to the appropriate regional forum only to be told to figure them out myself because that's part of the fun of scanning. That, I knew. Thanks for nothing. By the way, I have some idea on most of them - not really the point of the post! Michigan is very active with digital and TGs ... I've got a bunch of TGs that aren't ID'd on RR.com.
I think that could be an entire other forum under each region.
If people don't want to mess around with unknown IDs, they can skip it.
Moderators????????????????

 

[cdenton]

Unknown IDs

BTW, we are asked not to submit unidentified info ... so it has to be brought up in a forum.

 

[loumaag]

Re: Unknown TG IDs

I'm in - I've tried posting unknown TG IDs to the appropriate regional forum only to be told to figure them out myself because that's part of the fun of scanning. That, I knew. Thanks for nothing. By the way, I have some idea on most of them - not really the point of the post! Michigan is very active with digital and TGs ... I've got a bunch of TGs that aren't ID'd on RR.com.
I think that could be an entire other forum under each region.
If people don't want to mess around with unknown IDs, they can skip it.
Moderators????????????????

Okay, it is only a matter of symantics, but Moderators moderate forums. Administrators administrate the database. If you are commenting about posting UNK TG's in a fourm to generate ideas about what they were, it certainly wasn't in a regional forum I monitor. If you are talking about submitting unknown ID's to the database...well read above, they will be rejected. That is the webmaster's policy, hence the site policy. Since the webmaster (Lindsay) has specifically stated that unidentified ID's (or conv. freq's for that matter) should be discussed in the local forums until they are identified, anyone who ridiculed you for doing so needs to be reminded who makes the rules around here.

 

[cdenton]

UNK TGs

Thanks for clearing up Mod vs Admin for me, Lou.
I posted in the Michigan forum. I didn't mean to imply that anyone made fun of me, 'cause it wasn't like that. In fact, the reply I mentioned was from a guy who was a big help to me when I first started scanning about a month and a half ago. He posts in a lot of the forum areas, and I apologize if I gave the wrong impression.
I guess it just seems like it would be nice to have an area for that kind of info/discussion that is somehow associated with the regional forums. I hear quite a few TGs that aren't in the database - it would be fun to talk about what they might be, I think.