[FedCom] DCS

Mon, 20 Oct 2003 00:40:38 +0000

>From: [email protected]
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [FedCom] DCS
>Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 21:01:29 EDT
>
>APCO 25 DOESNT USE DCS  THEY USE NETWORK ACCESS CODES
>
>Over the past year, New Hampshire's Law Enforcement community was able to
>secure a grant, putting a big shot in the arm of New Hampshire's Law 
>Enforcement
>communications. During this time, many local and county police agencies 
>were
>able to make some great accomplishments in both equipment upgrade and 
>statewide
>interoperability.
>
>NH State Police secured a grant to in essence "Give" radios to local and
>couty PD's so that they could begin either migrating to or have access to 
>the
>APCO-25 Digital system. Through Motorola, they were able to provide these
>communities radios making it easier for those communities to offset 
>replacement costs
>and set a standard  to base future replacement costs. One benefit of this
>grant is that it's equipment based, not personnel based, which often causes
>problems with a new position that was funded by a grant. But at the end of 
>the grant
>forces the community to either lay off the person in the position, or 
>absorb
>the cost in local taxes. Being equipment, they can just purchase it and go
>(although eventual replacement will again be required).
>
>The majority of the radios purchased, I've been told, were mobiles to be
>installed in vehicles. Some places that may have already had mobiles, were 
>given
>the option to obtain portables in place of mobiles. The cost of the digital
>technology can be expensive so this grant has really helped some smaller
>communities that just couldn't afford the radios to get them. The 
>capabilities of the
>radios (in digital or analog mode) are a true plus for the communities that
>have received them.
>
>These radios have the capability to operate on the State Police Troop and
>other digital frequencies vastly improving interoperability with state 
>agencies.
>In addition, as more communities build up their APCO-25 capabilities (with
>many going to 24/7 digital), it helps the other communities operate with 
>their
>neighbors. This truly uses ultra-modern and backwards compatable 
>technologies to
>the fullest extent.
>DIGITAL SCANNER ARRIVES:
>
>Much to some peoples dismay, the scanner capable of receiving APCO-25 
>digital
>voice signals is available. Initial reports are good on monitoring the
>various agencies in NH that utilize digital. One thing of note is that the 
>scanner
>"DOES NOT" show the scanner user the "Network Access Code" (NAC) whcih is
>more/less like a PL on the digital system (it really isn't, but the closest
>relation in what's been known in the past). What this means for New 
>Hampshire's Law
>Enforcement community is that unless a person has connections to someone 
>inside
>the LEC, a less mentally stable scanner listener (sorry folks, most scanner
>listeners are perfectly normal people) with access to digital capable 
>two-ways
>could not obtain the NAC from the scanner, put it in a two-way radio and
>interfere with operations. They have to know someone that knows the NAC's 
>to do
>this. Although for the mentally stable, but more serious scanner buff, it's 
>kind
>of fun to compare who uses what for operations (including NAC's). It makes 
>the
>scanner very useful in that one can listen to the digital traffic without
>getting "Too Much Information", while not forcing police to be paranoid 
>that
>folks will now jump on their frequencies and cause problems. It allows a 
>tighter
>control of who is and is not on the system at the radio shop and agency 
>level.
>Also it only does the voice traffic, not other traffic (MDT's, etc), so
>additional security is in place if needed.
>
>I assume some operations will eventually become encrypted digital (remember
>digital is not and never was intended to be secret or encrypted in it's
>operation). This adds cost to radios with the capability so it would 
>probably be
>limited to operations in true need of secrecy (Drug Enforcement, Major 
>Crimes,
>Undercover work, etc). The scanners on the market will not do encrypted 
>digital,
>nor should they. While I have questioned in the past any need for routine 
>or
>day-to-day police operations to be encrypted, there are situations that 
>require
>full secrecy and no scanner should ever be made to monitor that
>traffic....EVER!! These are truly cases where ignorance is bliss.
>
>Another factor is that these new digital capable radios are pretty darn
>expensive (for the full digital capability). The scanner itself costs over 
>$300 and
>the digital APCO-25 card also costs around $300 making it really a scanner
>for serious scanner buffs and not a likely an option for the vast majority 
>of
>criminals (Most dont have $600+ to blow just to listen to the cops and if 
>they
>do, they're making too much money to have much time to take the college 
>style
>courses they'd need to learn how to use the darn thing).
>
>  FROM :
>http://www.geocities.com/jmarcel66/digiupdate.html
>_______________________________________________
>FedCom mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fedcom

   Well, that answers that. Thanks alot to you both. One more question. On 
many of the federal P-25 freqs there is an open carrier, and on stronger 
freqs I can hear a tone. It's not on ALL the freqs, but it is on quite a 
few. The tone does not hit on any CTCSS tones. What is this? (it sure makes 
the new freqs easy to find...)  Ruff

_________________________________________________________________
See when your friends are online with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now 
FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com