[TrunkCom] another possibility

[JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON]

Maybe the people you were hearing that were switching talk group IDS were
patching together tossomething else perhaps conventional, but I would have
to look again at the status bits you provided.  This I'm assuming wasn't
just an example talk group, and in which case the varying talk groups if
just type II status bits would be in some kind of encrypted talk group,
but that is out of the question obviously because they are in the
clear.  I think that in a trunking system's blocks type I and II IDS can
be in the same block.  I know that a few years ago here in Michgian Ann
Arbor and University of Michigan was like that with a few blocks with type
I and II designations from what I remember reading.





On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Todd Hartzel wrote:

> Greetings all,
>        I'm about to pose another idea on the subject of mis-behaved
> talkgroups in a Type II designated Block.  Here goes:
> 
> While I was showering just now (getting ready for work), it occured
> to be that about 2 1/2 years ago, before I started working down at
> Tucker (12th street) & Clark in downtown St Louis, I was working
> near Arsenal & S Broadway in the Soulard Industrial area.
> 
> While I was there, I did some extensive monitoring of the America's
> Center TRS, just shortly after they changed it over from Type I to
> Type II.  Now, here is the 'Bomb-Shell' or 'Opening of the Can of
> Worms':
> 
> I remember monitoring conversations that were using Differant IDs
> for each user that was speaking ; that was apart of the main
> conversation.  These user radios would have a differing ID of
> just a few digits or so.  Example:
> 
> - 57467
> - 57458
> - 57454
> etc...   You get the picture.......
> 
> Now, the first thing I did (knowing its Type II Block #7) is enable
> the 'Status-Bit' function of my 245xlt.  Thinking, oh, that would
> quickly resolve the problem.
> 
> Nope......
> 
> The users involved in the conversations were still not showing up
> on the same talkgroup.  This stunned me into assuming...
> 
> ONLY one other possible alternative...
> 
> They are Type I users.  But how can that be, being right in the
> middle of a known Type II block.  Even as those comms were 
> going on, other users in Block #7 were on their correct Type II
> talkgroups.  Nothing weird was happening with those other
> users talking.  So....  Here it is.......
> 
> Now, before I 'Rip the Rug from Underneath You', try to keep an
> open mind on this:
> 
> - Is it possible, for Type I users (Type I talkgroups) to co-exist
> in the very same block that has been designated:  TYPE II ????
> 
> (please re-read the question again.  
> Please don't misunderstand it)
> 
> I know it sounds incredable, even weird.  But is it possible?  
> Ok, let's think about it.  I remember a rumor that came
> out about the same time as America's Center switched from
> Type I to Type II, that stated Motorola was working on trying to
> confuse TrunkTracker scanners.  Think about it.  Is this Motorola's
> bad attempt (failed attempt) to confuse TrunkTrackers?
> 
> Everyting listed above on the  talkgroups is true.  I welcome
> anyone that would like to verify it.  Try it.........
> 
> 
> 
> 73 from todd hartzel / n0vkg
> http://www.icon-stl.net/~toddh
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TrunkCom mailing list
> mailto:TrunkCom@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/trunkcom
>