Unmonitorable State/City/County Radio Systems

[lschmidt]

Each state administrator/moderator should post a sticky listing the
locations that are unmonitorable in his/her state.

 

[poltergeisty]

Very good idea. I agree. :idea:

Anyone else?

 

[JoeyC]

This information is already available in the database listings. If the system is ProVoice or P25 encrypted, it will say so.

 

[loumaag]

Let me just add a couple of comments.

The database is the proper place to get information in regards to frequencies, systems, etc.

The forums are a place to discuss various facets of radio monitoring, not what particurlar system is what (except as to how to do something or another.) JoeyC is correct, that information is available in the database.

Another point to be made is, who is to judge what is monitorable or not. 18 months ago, I couldn't monitor P25 signals. There are people out there without trunking scanners that can't monitor TRS's. There are also people out there with LPE's that can monitor ProVoice. It is up to the individual to check out what is in his/her area, and make the determination if he/she can monitor a system, with the equipment at hand.

 

[poltergeisty]

LPE's???

 

[nd5y]

http://www.macom-wireless.com/products/pve/prodFullDetail.asp?id=26

 

[poltergeisty]

So someone can program one and hear pro-voice? Is this really worth mentioning because of the great complexities required for "joe schmoe"?

So I guess with this, the title for a database should be "legally Unmonitorable Radio Systems"

18 months ago, I couldn't monitor P25 signals. There are people out there without trunking scanners that can't monitor TRS's.

Thats yours and someone elses problem. My point here is that the system was/is monitorable. To argue a point on the bases of whether you or someone else has a radio to listen is not a bases for such an argument.

If 18 months ago Town xyz is not monitorable then it would be beneficial to some one to know by a click of the mouse. I can see the point with that there is a database but a quicker reference some how would be cool. Again this is Radio reference all subject matter should be "categorized and easly referenced." (X-Files)

I am not puting you down just want to state a truthful statement in my own opinion.

 

[JoeyC]

Again this is Radio reference all subject matter should be "categorized and easly referenced."

Everything is quite well organized as it is. Your proposal would be to create duplicate information across both the database and forums. Anyone with database experience knows that kind of arrangement doesn't work. Information may be put in the database that the forums won't get or vice versa. If you want to know what type of system is in use for a particular local, use the database. Fumbling through forums to find out whether BFE sheriff office is monitorable or not is a waste of time, and resources when the information is already posted. Not to mention all the know-it-alls :wink: who will dispute the other guys entry in the forums.

One other thing, EVERYTHING is monitorable with the right equipment.

 

[loumaag]

So I guess with this, the title for a database should be "legally Unmonitorable Radio Systems"

There is nothing illegal about owing a radio which can monitor ProVoice. There are plenty of people who own such radios, mainly of course in areas that use ProVoice. It is just like owning a scanner, except it is a disabled transciever (or at least should be disabled.)

Your idea has some merit, but as JoeyC points out, it would duplicate data already contained in the database. As a general rule, the database is the place for data dealing with monitoring specifc systems. The forums are for discussions about monitoring. Posting frequencies in the forums (or any other data like it) has always been frowned on, even before RR was RR.

 

[poltergeisty]

I once asked about getting a Moto. radio for listening and I was flamed like crazy. So if I had a provoice radio, and was carrying it while on a walk, and a cop does a contact and sees that I have one he is not going to say anything?

Another thing is that there is a sticky in the Texas forum about provoice not being monitor capable. Huh? My point- This was a sticky representing a non monitor capable system. My philosophy here is for the average "Joe" I think "lschmidt" might agree.

Heres the idea-


..................................Non monitor capable Systems..................................


.....................................................Texas-................................................



City.............. Year implemented......... System type


XYZ.................... 1999 ...................... Provoice

ABC .................... 2001..................... Iden





......................................Alaska.........................................................



City.............. Year implemented......... System type




Doolittle....................... 2004..................... Tetra

widget......................... 2007..................... Provoice





..........................................ETC...........................................................


ETC.......................... ETC........................... ETC.

ETC......................... ETC............................. ETC.

ETC....................... ETC.............................. ETC.



This is really simple, it would just be a table. I believe that 95% of the people who go to this site don't have the capability nor the money to listen to such systems. Hence "unmonitorable". Maybe there could be a disclaimer that states- " Unless proper equipment is to be used" Which brings me to this question. Why is there not a forum for the programing of Moto. radios and others? Is it illegal? :shock:

I think this is a really neat idea and denotes to the subject line in the web site name "REFERENCE". In my opinion, more reference martial the better. One could continue with other web pages. Many examples come to mind. How many towers in city locations, -UTM- or -DD-MM-SS- look ups, changes that have accrued to the system, enter a talk group and get all matches and locations. Maybe system cost could be added next to the system type in the table above. I know the -FCC- web site has some of this but an innovative and better way of inputing information would be neat. I know the database is working on a click able map- thats neat. There are endless possible reference ideas to include which denotes the "REFERENCE" name. This would make the site even more unprecedented and awesome. I bet if this site was given a nickel for every time someone asked "Can you hear provoice" or " Is this monitorable" This site would be rich! Or at least make a lot of money. :shock:

So let me see if I can find some common ground for us. I could perhaps do research on all the citys in the U.S. and Canada as well as with the other countrys mentioned here, on which citys have a deemed non monitor capable system and post it to my table idea in the Trunking forum and you can make it a sticky. That sounds reasonable. This might take some time though and I would need some guidance. It would need to be updated of course. Hopefully with the omission of "Last edited by Poltergeisty on such and such." But then (Than?) again that could be beneficial to someone doing a quick check as to see if anything changed. I know I would. You know the more I think about this the more it sounds you two are right about the current database. Because my first research will come from the database it self LOL. But, I am creating a simple table with citys that are not monitor capable. I can see now how multiple table information can get to be a doldrum. Two would be alright and no more. (1)Kinda like a check and balance. Or a positive and negative view capability. As simple as Black and white. ( 1- Hope one of those sentences makes sense.)

At last I come to the end of my post. I hope that some of my ideas mentioned here are of interest. I know that such a table would be astronomical, so a solution is to go by citys only with trunked systems. This would be some what of a helpful factor in creating such a table, and by denoting this in my indicated disclaimer above. Example: " All citys listed here are known to be using a trunked system. Citys without a known trunked system are not listed. Any system here is potentially monitor capable provided proper equipment is to be used"

This is why something like this would need to be multiple web pages deep. Hence an addition to the site. I hope I don't sound like a nut. I did live in Cali. although not native. :lol:

 

[unitcharlie]

:idea: how 'bout some pages in the rr-wiki that cover this.... will be in rr.com but would be available for input from all members.... just a way, perhaps, to get all the info out there quickly and accurately...

 

[loumaag]

Okay, let me address this in order to try make you understand what is what and where information is.

I once asked about getting a Moto. radio for listening and I was flamed like crazy. So if I had a provoice radio, and was carrying it while on a walk, and a cop does a contact and sees that I have one he is not going to say anything?

The first part is not true, if you think you were being flamed, you really need to get a pair of glasses. (That was a little warm air. ) As to the policeman, well as long as the radio wouldn't transmit, he really can't say anything can he? And even if it could transmit, you get into the whole "who has responsiblitiy for enforcing FCC rules" thing, which is better left for some other thread. Lots of people own Motorola radios for personal (non-commercial) use. Some have them for scanning some have them for ham use. Yes, even the digital ones as there are several APCO-25 digital ham repeaters (as well as other digital modes) in use in the US. So what will the "cop" say? I don't know, I'm not there. Now this part of your previous post stems from my comment about LPE radios, which are can be used on EDACS ProVoice sytsems. The same comments apply; however, one difference is that on the APCO-25 systems, a radio is designed to affiliate before it can receive, that requires transmitting which is where you run afoul of the law, whereas that is not the case on EDACS ProVoice systems...Enough, onward.

Another thing is that there is a sticky in the Texas forum about provoice not being monitor capable. Huh? My point- This was a sticky representing a non monitor capable system. My philosophy here is for the average "Joe" I think "lschmidt" might agree.

Well, yes. There are actually two sticky's in reference to the San Antonio Pub Safety system there at the head of the TX forum. Two things are operable here; you have been a member of this site for almost a year, surely in that time you must have noticed that the owner lives in San Antonio and that this entire site has it's roots in Texas. (Ye-haw!) Another thing, is that the topics of both are not about how the system is not monitorable, it is about the system and how poor it was working for the amount of money being wasted... err... spent, and the ESK thing which affects other systems. ESK, just for general knowledge, is not encryption; despite the implacation from the name.

The rest of what you say, has some merit, as I indicated before. The point I am trying to make, and has been made already, is that the information you are talking about already exists, especially when it comes to information about towers, sites, etc. (You have looked at the DB I assume. (Another breath of warm air.)) It exists in the database. The database is organized, just like you describe. Every system at the top of the page tells you what kind of system it is. It is up to the individual to decide if it is monitorable or not. Why should we duplicate the effort? Another point, is administrative. If we did duplicate the effort as you suggest, then who takes care of it? Who makes sure the topic doesn't go awry, much like your topic about the gettting a Moto radio which got locked when it went out of control. If you look at the state forums, you will see the only common moderator is Lindsay. He is the only one who can fix a problem anywhere. He is not doing that much anymore, which is the reason there are more moderators. The database on the other hand has 60+ administrators (which are not listed anywhere you can see) and we do a pretty good job of doing exactly what you want, where it belongs, in the database.

Now, as to unitcharlie's idea about the Wiki. Well, the Wiki is there for users, such as yourself to post information which is of general interest for the Radio Reference community. If you want to start a page (or pages) about such a topic as "Unmonitorable Systems" then you go ahead. I am not going to jump down your throat about it, but I am not going to promise that someone else won't. I will just repeat that the forums are not the place for such information.

 

[poltergeisty]

The first part is not true, if you think you were being flamed, you really need to get a pair of glasses. (That was a little warm air. )

Of course. But it was under the definition. I feel that I am always subjected to the flames. Definition: "An insulting criticism or remark meant to incite anger, as on a computer network."

With all the people telling me this and that and about a dark path, well that was inciting anger on to me in my belief. Can't have a moto. radio, Ha! I shall have what ever I shall wants. There are many other things that I have done and are doing that define a dark path quite well. :lol: :wink:

As to the policeman, well as long as the radio wouldn't transmit, he really can't say anything can he? And even if it could transmit, you get into the whole "who has responsiblitiy for enforcing FCC rules" thing, which is better left for some other thread. Lots of people own Motorola radios for personal (non-commercial) use. Some have them for scanning some have them for ham use. Yes, even the digital ones as there are several APCO-25 digital ham repeaters (as well as other digital modes) in use in the US. So what will the "cop" say? I don't know, I'm not there.

I never knew there were ham radio Apco-25 reapeaters. :shock:

Well, yes. There are actually two sticky's in reference to the San Antonio Pub Safety system there at the head of the TX forum. Two things are operable here; you have been a member of this site for almost a year, surely in that time you must have noticed that the owner lives in San Antonio and that this entire site has it's roots in Texas. (Ye-haw!)

Your point?

I actually been a member longer then a year. Just a new name is all.

Well of course I knew Mr. Blanton lived in Texas.

Another thing, is that the topics of both are not about how the system is not monitorable, it is about the system and how poor it was working for the amount of money being wasted... err... spent, and the ESK thing which affects other systems. ESK, just for general knowledge, is not encryption; despite the implacation from the name.

Huh???

Well the number 2 item in the Texas forum intilted "Listening to San Antonio - the FAQ", it says the following-

2. "The system uses ProVoice Digital modulation for most public safety operations. This means that your scanner WILL NOT monitor the digital talkgroups on this system. There is no way possible to monitor any ProVoice digital communications with any scanner today. All of SAPD and SA Fire operations are in ProVoice digital mode. Most of BCSO is ProVoice digital. Trunktracker scanners will ignore any ProVoice talkgroups and not even display them, regardless of whether or not you can track the system or not. "

My point here is that it seems to me this is the skinny as to why you can't hear it because of everyone asking. Emphasizing the average Joe however!



Also to the fact that after propilot5000's comments it was about not hearing the system. Nothing in either subject refers to money spending? To me it is geared toward the premise of a non monitable system and it's ESK statues.

The rest of what you say, has some merit, as I indicated before. The point I am trying to make, and has been made already, is that the information you are talking about already exists

My thought was a salt and pepper view on the data. Like I said with this sentence. "Or a positive and negative view capability." Meaning that there are monitor capable talk groups and deemed "non monitor capable talk groups".

But I totally understand you. I hope you don't have a headache because of my constant emphases. :wink: Sounds weird after what I said, but I like to really lay down my thoughts. You and everyone else might have guessed this already. :lol:

Now, as to unitcharlie's idea about the Wiki. Well, the Wiki is there for users, such as yourself to post information which is of general interest for the Radio Reference community. If you want to start a page (or pages) about such a topic as "Unmonitorable Systems" then you go ahead.

Ok. Be awhile though.

I will just repeat that the forums are not the place for such information.

Well actually a lot of people have posted info. on talk groups and frequencies, some of which are very long.

I think perhaps you are referring to my table idea though. :wink:

 

[bsavery]

As a relative newbie to the world of scanners, I'm gonna toss my opinion in the ring.....

I don't think there's any reason to have a seperate list, table, database, sticky... or anything else for "unmonitorable" systems.

First off... there's no such thing as an unmonitorable system. Sure... I can't walk into Radio Shack and buy a Provoice scanner, but I'll bet I can find one on EBay or some such place. Legality means squat in the face of will power and money!

Besides... there's a group of folks in a brick building somewhere who don't have the word unmonitorable in their vocab! :shock:

But... the main reason is this.... a new scanner user who is graced with the fortune of finding this place is looking for 1 thing... what do I set my new ScanMaster 2000 to so I can listen to the Dog Catcher?. They want to go to the database, click on their state, click on their city, and be presented with information. And if they can't find the frequency or talkgroup for those %$*#@ snowplows, another totally seperate database isn't where they want to go just to find out they can't listen to it.

If you want to tag a system as unmonitorable by normal mortals, do so on that truck system page. Just add another field. Can be listened to with _____. Then fill in the field with regular scanner, trunktracker, Digital Trunktracker, NSA Black Boxes Only... whatever.

OK... that's my opinion anyway.... "Please resume the petty bickering."

Bob

Warning... this opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it!

 

[unitcharlie]

Bob, I think you hit the nail on the head:

OK... that's my opinion anyway.... "Please resume the petty bickering."

Can we act like adults in here, please! This is a "newbie" who, once again, has explained what all of us were looking for when we found this place...
Sometimes when I visit I don't have two hours to wade thru the bickering and flaming to find new information or answers to my questions. Perhaps Lindsay can make a room just for bickering and flaming and all the moderators can move threads that have degenerated to that room so the rest of us can enjoy our hobby, new found information and the web site.
:roll:

 

[n4voxgill]

tell that newbie if he doesn't have an abestos suit to call 911 before the flames get to big. Get along, hell no

 

[loumaag]

Perhaps Lindsay can make a room just for bickering and flaming and all the moderators can move threads that have degenerated to that room so the rest of us can enjoy our hobby, new found information and the web site.

:roll:
I think that the RR Tavern comes pretty close to this. In any case, that is where most such ... debates... end up. Just before they get locked. :lol:

 

[bsavery]

tell that newbie if he doesn't have an abestos suit to call 911 before the flames get to big. Get along, hell no

ROTFLOL :lol:

This ain't got nothin on some of the flame wars i've been smack dab in the middle of in some of the politics groups! Heck.. as someone said in a different post elsewhere... this ain't even a warm breeze!

I shouldn't say I'm a total newbie though. My first scanner was a 4 channel Fallon crystal hand held. Unfortunately I got out of it about the time they started coming out with these fancy digital gizmos though! :?

Back to the fun!! (Which at the moment is listening to the Bellevue PD look for a suspect in Old Towne that was last seen running down an alley with a handgun! :shock: )

Bob

 

[SCPD]

Each state administrator/moderator should post a sticky listing the
locations that are unmonitorable in his/her state.

I think this could be done as a report - pulling the data from the RR DB. Let the admins manage keeping the data straight and you'll get an accurate listing.

(As opposed to giving the admins one more task to do).

-rick

 

[poltergeisty]

I agree.

To others who don't understand: All I am saying is a plain vanilla no thrills look up on "Non monitor capable systems" what I have said numerous times before. " Sure there are people who hear them, but it is my guess that they are far and few between. Hence a great addition to the site. I don't mean to be "bickering". EDIT Another thing I should add to a table is -ESK- statues, do to the fact that if there were coms. in analog they would be heard if -ESK- is off. Gesss, this was not even my topic

Ok this is