HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong)
Subject: Re: Amusing QRM story
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 21:05:34 GMT

walsh@optilink.COM (Mark Walsh) writes:

>Cops in Lancaster, PA got to listen to jingle bells
>this Christmas season.  At first, they were amused
>as it only was heard on the output of their repeater
>when a weaker station was coming in, but it did not
>go away.  The FCC quickly tracked it to the home of
>a little old lady who had a musical Christmas
>ornament that had malfunctioned in a most bizarre
>way, and she lives only two blocks from the police
>department repeater.  The FCC confiscated the
>device, and told her that they would either fix it
>or would pay her for it.

>Any other good QRM stories out there?

What a great UL.
-- 
Dave Bushong, Wang Laboratories, Inc.   Amateur Radio Callsign KZ1O
Project Leader, OCR products            kz1o@n0ary.#noca.ca.na
Internet: dbushong@wang.com
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: mikebo@timesink.chi.il.us (Michael Borowiec)
Subject: Re: 800MHz Trunked Radio System Signals
Organization: HAM Radio Station N9EUZ, Naperville, IL
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 06:19:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.180128.21441@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>In article <92360.134725PJB113@psuvm.psu.edu> me <PJB113@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>]As more and more services switch to trunked systems, I'm sure the scanner
>]companies will eventually develop scanners with trunking capabillities. I
>]strongly believe that the same thing is true with digital encryption. Too
>]much money is involved in communications monitoring for it to go down
>]the tubes just because of trunking and encryption. -PJB
>
>A couple of problems with this:
>  (1) It seems like each trunking system uses different signalling technology.
>      Thus any scanner would have to be able to handle a bunch of these,
>      and would become obsolete quickly. 

Agreed...

>  (2) It is illegal to receive digitally encrypted signals. I don't know
>      if it is illegal to build decryptors, but if it isn't, it would be
>      quickly.

I don't think you can outlaw a thing... only the illegal use of a thing.
There are exceptions however, such as drugs and dangerous weapons. I don't
think an electronics hobby kit would fall into this catagory. That's how
companies get away with selling cable de-scramblers - in kit form.

>  (3) The digital encryption schemes are quite strong. I doubt that you
>      could afford a scanner that could decrypt them (without knowing the
>      key beforehand). Such a scanner would probably cost at least
>      $20,000,000 (in order to crack the DES code). Now, you are probably
>      going to respond "yeah, but they cracked the Videocipher" to which
>      I shall pre-emptively respond: "Yes, but that's different."

I dunno about the $20M part. (-8  Now you can buy a 50MIPS machine
under $5000. Within a year or two, you'll be able to buy a 100MIPS
machine for the same $. The DES code is only RELATIVELY secure. Just
read anything on the NSA if you doubt that. They eat DES encoded
messages for lunch. The US Government wants to establish the DES as
a standard so they can read your mail while still permitting you
RELATIVE protection from your competitors. Note that vendors sell
two different types of DVP equipment: one for businesses/consumers
the other for government use.
- Mike

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Borowiec  (N9EUZ)  -  mikebo@timesink.chi.il.us  -  mikebo@isc.com
  >>> Dedicated to the Pursuit of Computer Assisted Time Dissipation <<<
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ci167@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (David Hoppe)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Pro-41 Mods
Date: 27 Dec 1992 17:07:09 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


	I'm looking for any Mods for a RS PRO-41. I don't have FTP
access so could you please mail them to me or post them here? Thanks.
From: PLAWS@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: 800MHz Trunked Radio System Signals
Date: 27 Dec 1992 13:08:23 -0600
Organization: University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

>>>Well I am rather upset by our fire department going to this new system.
>While
>>>I realize that they need more channels I feel that I have the right to listen
>>>to public services.  Apparently they feel differently.
>>
Debatable.  The airwaves  *are* public.  (except the part we _gave_ to
the Cellular Telephone Industry Association..but that's another thread)
I think the FD's "right" to a system that meets their needs may outweigh
your "right" to monitor them.  Too bad your elected reps. went for a GE
system, though.  Motorola systems are much more nonuser-friendly.


>>That's an interesting viewpoint I've heard at several fire scenes since
>>Toledo went up to 800...  I'm assuming that you're being sarcastic, but
>>I have talked to some who think that TFD just moved up to keep
>>monitors off the air!  I've tried to explain the massive
>>benifits of a trunked, computerized system over the old VHF but
>>that never works.
>>
>>I'll admit that I sure do miss monitoring like I used to, but if
>>I were a firefighter I sure would appreciate all the benefits of
>>the new system (realizing that it is not a "right" to have to have
>>uncoded, easy to listen to broadcasts for the general public...)

Is it a right?  They are _public_ servants.  We pay them.  We authorize
the purchase of the radio systems.  Why _shouldn't_ we be allowed to
"keep an eye" on what they're doing?  It's not like it's a drug bust (if
they don't scramble their sensitve comms, they deserve to be monitored).

>that it will work well.  I am still awaiting the forms and hope I can buy a
>radio from the city so I can continue to monitor the fire department here.  I
>don't know if other citys here are going to buy new radio systems.  They
>probably are going to see how well it works for Oakland first.
>


Ah Ha!  So that's the plan!  *Sell* monitors to the public.  Clever.
Control the information that the masses get *and* make them pay for it.

Peter Laws              |"The '90s are gonna make the '60s|   pcl@engr.uark.edu
n5uwy@ka5bml.ar.usa.noam| look like the '50s"--D. Hopper  |plaws@uafsysb.bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: 800MHz Trunked Radio System Signals
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 10:23:29 GMT

mikebo@timesink.chi.il.us (Michael Borowiec) writes:
: 
: >  (2) It is illegal to receive digitally encrypted signals. I don't know
: >      if it is illegal to build decryptors, but if it isn't, it would be
: >      quickly.
: 
: I don't think you can outlaw a thing... only the illegal use of a thing.
: There are exceptions however, such as drugs and dangerous weapons. I don't
: think an electronics hobby kit would fall into this catagory. That's how
: companies get away with selling cable de-scramblers - in kit form.

And, why should you be able to outlaw drugs and "dangerous weapons"? Just
because many people don't like them? How about just outlawing the dangerous
use of these items? We already have plenty of laws for that - we don't need
any more.

Bill
From: marks@mgse.UUCP (Mark Seiffert)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: PRO-30 Info
Summary: 800Mhz mod?
Date: 29 Dec 92 05:21:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: mgse

In article <1h7vfgINNo17@life.ai.mit.edu> moisan@silver.lcs.mit.edu (David Moisan) writes:
<I own a PRO-30, bought used for $50.  The frequency coverage is 30-54,
<118-136 (AM), 138-174, and 380-512, typical for most RS scanners.  No
<800 Mhz.  Sensitivity is average for scanners of that era (mid-80's).
<The radio will not handle urban environments too well.  
< 

Is it possible to adapt this radio to receive 800Mhz?



<-- 
<| David Moisan, N1KGH    /^\_/^\   dmoisan@pro-angmar.alfalfa.com |
<| 86 Essex St. Apt #204 ( o ^ o )  moisan@silver.lcs.mit.edu      |
<| Salem. MA 01970-5225     | |                                    |
<\-----------------------------------------------------------------/


-- 
Mark Seiffert,  Metairie, LA.
uucp:           rex.cs.tulane.edu!mgse!marks or rex!mgse!marks
bitnet:         marks%mgse@REX.CS.TULANE.EDU
internet:       marks%mgse@rex.cs.tulane.edu or marks@mgse.UUCP
From: john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Roll Your Own Trunked Scanner?
Date: 28 Dec 92 07:42:34 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In <1992Dec27.212414.18458@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel):
> My understanding of trunked 800MHz communication is that one channel
> is used to control all communications on the other channels.

There are three competing systems for trunked radios--GE, Motorola, and
Johnson.  The Motorola system uses a dedicated data channel to control
the conversations.  The GE system does not have a dedicated data channel.
Although I have never studied the Johnson system, I believe that it is
a compromise between the GE and Motorola systems (ie, the data channel
could be made available to converstaions when system demand is high).

> It does not seem too difficult to me to builda scanner with two receiver
> sections, one for the control channel and one for the data signals.

No, it probably isn't.  In fact, you could start with a trunked radio
and rework the program in the ROM chip.

> All that is needed then is a computer program to decode the control
> information and to use that information to follow the desired signal(s)
> through its(their) frequency changes.

The whole idea of a trunked system is that you can have a number of
conversations going on at the same time.  With 5 voice channels, you have
a 90% probability of getting into the trunked system when there are 11 other
conversations in process.  What algorithm would you use to pick which 
conversation to follow?  You might end up tracking two cops discussing
donut shops while the fire people are dispatching a 6 alarm fire.

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
From: cscon0151@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Mystified newbie: CB? How?
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:08:23 EST
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

justin@psg.com (Justin Norman) writes:
> 
> Greetings, I own a BC 200XLT and was wondering why I can't
> pick up CB channels?  Possibly a different type of modulation
> or something?   Unfortunately I am not to familiar with 
> the electronics world, hence do not know enough to answer
> my own question.   
>  
> Is there a mod I can do?   I can't remember off the top of
> my head but I think CB is 16mHz to 25mHZ.
> 
> thanks!
> jn
> 
> justin@psg.com

The Class C and D Citizens Band is between 26.965Mhz and 27.405Mhz.  I don't
believe it is feasible to modify your BC to pick up these freqs.  The only HTs
(that can be considered a 'scanner') that I can think of the do tune to the CB
channels (AM only) is the Icom R1 and the AOR1000.   The AOR 900 begins its 
coverage at 27.000Mhz (at least that's what the ad says), covering the the
majority of the band.  

I wish I could pick up CB on my PRO-43 too...although it isn't vital that I
do....At least I can pick it up on my PRO-2006...


Later...

Brad Steinman
University of Toledo Computer Services
cscon0151@uoft02.utoledo.edu
From: plaws@uafhp.uark.edu (Peter Laws)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Scanner stuff Scanned
Date: 3 Jan 1993 12:05:38 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


Bored again at work today.  Scanned in Fire Alarm Box lists for Walpole
& Foxboro, Mass., as well as Station/Unit list for Montreal, Canada.  Mail
me if you want 'em.  (or tell me what ftp site to post them to...)

Peter Laws              |"The '90s are gonna make the '60s|plaws@uafhp.uark.edu
n5uwy@ka5bml.ar.usa.noam| look like the '50s"  --D. Hopper|plaws@uafsysb.bitnet
From: moisan@silver.lcs.mit.edu (David Moisan)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: PRO-30 Info
Followup-To: alt.radio.scanner
Date: 22 Dec 1992 20:57:20 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: silver.ai.mit.edu
Summary: PRO-30 specs

I own a PRO-30, bought used for $50.  The frequency coverage is 30-54,
118-136 (AM), 138-174, and 380-512, typical for most RS scanners.  No
800 Mhz.  Sensitivity is average for scanners of that era (mid-80's).
The radio will not handle urban environments too well.  
 
Almost forgot, it has but 16 channels, which is painfully small;  the
antenna connector is standard BNC.  Power is +9V or six AA cells 
(nicads are OK).  One caution:  although there's a CHG (charge) jack
on the radio, there's no charge circuitry inside the radio--I fried some batterys once when I put the AC adapter on (as I do almost all the time, since
the radio's my one and only scanner).
 
Depending on condition, it's a nice second radio, but it definitely shows
its age.
 


-- 
| David Moisan, N1KGH    /^\_/^\   dmoisan@pro-angmar.alfalfa.com |
| 86 Essex St. Apt #204 ( o ^ o )  moisan@silver.lcs.mit.edu      |
| Salem. MA 01970-5225     | |                                    |
\-----------------------------------------------------------------/
From: plaws@uafhp.uark.edu (Peter Laws)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Strike the Box!
Date: 2 Jan 1993 13:03:04 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Yes, it's boring here at the Ol' computer lab...so I scanned in the Fire
Alarm Box lists for Foxboro and Walpole Mass.  (If you don't know what a
"fire alarm box" is, you probably live to far south or west...).  If
anyone wants them I'll be happy to send them.  If anyone would like to
trade that would be even better.   


22-22

Peter Laws              |"The '90s are gonna make the '60s|plaws@uafhp.uark.edu
n5uwy@ka5bml.ar.usa.noam| look like the '50s"  --D. Hopper|plaws@uafsysb.bitnet


Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: 381.380MHz Monitoring
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:15:40 GMT

PJB113@psuvm.psu.edu (me) writes:
:     In the apartment complex where I live, the maintenance staff usehand-
: held radios tuned to 381.380MHz (a frequency allocated to millitary air-
: craft). How do I know this? Because I checked it on my startek counter
: several times. Whatpuzzles me is why are they using this frequency? I
: didn't bother to ask them because they might get suspicious of me.
: Another thing that puzzles me is that when I plug this frequencyin
: to my AR2500 I never hear anything. I've tried it on FM,AM and WFM
: with no success. I even set up a search bank with frequencies from
: 380-382MHz with no success. Could they be using digital encryption?

You would at least hear noise, if they were using encryption.  It may
be that your counter is being mislead by some other strong signal that
is nearby. 

Bill
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Mods...
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 10:58:21 GMT

gregs@hotcity.COM (Greg Stramback) writes:
: 
: Okay.  For those that don't know, here's the statement.  If your radio /
: scanner can't receive 800MHz when you purchase it, no modification (save for
: one of those litte black boxes that converts your UHF band reception into
: 800MHz) can make your radio receive the 800MHz band.  You need an entire

Change that to say "If the radio does not have 800 Mhz capabilities built
in, even though blocked, when you purchase it ....." and I will agree with
your statement.

Bill
From: plaws@uafhp.uark.edu (Peter Laws)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Ignore
Date: 1 Jan 1993 21:10:20 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Please ignore this message.  Thank you.  Have a nice day.

Peter Laws              |"The '90s are gonna make the '60s|plaws@uafhp.uark.edu
n5uwy@ka5bml.ar.usa.noam| look like the '50s"  --D. Hopper|plaws@uafsysb.bitnet
From: "derek buchler" <derek.buchler@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: another approach to f
Date: 26 Dec 92 15:36:28 EST
Reply-To: "derek buchler" <derek.buchler@channel1.com>
Distribution: alt
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

ML>While trying to think of a solution to the new laser radar it occurred to me
ML>that it would be neat if fuzz busters could talk to each other electronically

ML>If you had a laser detector, it doesn't help you avoid being caught.  But if
ML>your laser detector sent a transmitted a binary message continuously for five
ML>minutes after being scanned... that message could warn other detectors that a
ML>laser was active in the area.  As two cars passed, they would warn each other
ML>of what was ahead.  At highway speeds that would give you a five mile warning
ML>Of course, this approach would only work if a major manufacturer built it int
ML>all their detectors.

I think that it would be illegal to do such a thing since it is illegal
to broadcast anything about police activity and law enforcement.   What
you are suggesting is the equivalant (sp?) of my radar dector going off
and then picking up my CB mike and relaying the info.  This is
definitely a no-no.

Derek
---
  SLMR 2.1a  A bug is a feature that didn't make it into the manual.
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA

Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: hgpeach@ms.uky.edu (Harold Peach)
Subject: Re: Roll Your Own Trunked Scanner?
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 20:56:48 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

john@newave.newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:

>In <1992Dec27.212414.18458@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel):
>> My understanding of trunked 800MHz communication is that one channel
>> is used to control all communications on the other channels.

>There are three competing systems for trunked radios--GE, Motorola, and
>Johnson.  The Motorola system uses a dedicated data channel to control
>the conversations.  The GE system does not have a dedicated data channel.
>Although I have never studied the Johnson system, I believe that it is
>a compromise between the GE and Motorola systems (ie, the data channel
>could be made available to converstaions when system demand is high).

>> It does not seem too difficult to me to builda scanner with two receiver
>> sections, one for the control channel and one for the data signals.

>No, it probably isn't.  In fact, you could start with a trunked radio
>and rework the program in the ROM chip.

>> All that is needed then is a computer program to decode the control
>> information and to use that information to follow the desired signal(s)
>> through its(their) frequency changes.

>The whole idea of a trunked system is that you can have a number of
>conversations going on at the same time.  With 5 voice channels, you have
>a 90% probability of getting into the trunked system when there are 11 other
>conversations in process.  What algorithm would you use to pick which 
>conversation to follow?  You might end up tracking two cops discussing
>donut shops while the fire people are dispatching a 6 alarm fire.

I don't see where this would be any different than what you have now.
It is possible that the fire dept. may be dispatching a call on 1 freq.
while the police are busy on another.  Unless the scanner has a priority
channel, it just works on a 1st come 1st serve basis.  I believe trunked
scanners would have to treat each trunk channel as seperate freqs are
treated in today's scanners.  In the place of the delay feature on today's
scanners, a trunked "delay" would just follow the conversation to the
next frequency is it continued within x seconds.
-- 
Harold G. Peach, Jr.       ><>       N4FLZ       _%       hgpeach@s.ms.uky.edu
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
From: brett@surfpix.princeton.edu (Brett Borowski)
Subject: Re: another approach to f
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:37:44 GMT

My understanding of the federal laws with regard to monitoring radio waves
was that the information could not legally be used for personal gain or to
aid the commission of an illegal act.  ie. speeding, eluding police, etc.
And the Citizen's Band guidelines seemed to prohibit a lot of stuff too, 
from business related converstions to information regarding criminal acts.

Of course Channel 19 used to be a great source of info on where there were
Smokies and such.  And I've transmissions in the 800mhz range from busses
relaying info on the locations of NJ state trooper.

And though it may be difficult for police to issue a summons for 
communicating info about their location, they CAN issue a summons for doing
58 in a 55 zone if they THINK that's what you're up to.  

The highway is a game.  70-75 mph on the NJ Turnpike (55mph limit) has
never gotten me a ticket.  And my father was "warned" for 75 but almost
surely would have gotten a ticket had he been using his radar detector.

Brett

-- 
brett@surfpix.princeton.edu		(Finger for more info...)
Xref: sparky alt.radio.scanner:3529 rec.radio.amateur.misc:21582
From: b1y1m39@kato.BELL-ATL.COM (Bob Esposito)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Antenna Question
Date: 1 Jan 93 04:16:01 GMT
Organization: Bell Atlantic


	I just mounted a on-glass scanner antenna from Radio Shack
	and it *sucks* !  Can anyone tell me how to get it off
	the windows?  I was thinking about using a freon agent,
	but I'm afraid of cracking the glass.   Any info would
	sure be helpful....

	I'd hate to leave just the ends on my new vehicle.


-Bob Esposito

-- 
======================================================================
Bob Esposito                       Voice/Voice Mail:    (215) 466-6831
Bell Atlantic Corp.                             FAX:    (215) 563-3984
Philadelphia, Pa.                    E-mail: b1y1m39@kato.BELL-ATL.COM
From: PJB113@psuvm.psu.edu (me)
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
Subject: Re: Monitoring America (Book)
Date: 26 Dec 92 17:08:01 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

Where can I get a copy, and is this book any better than "Police Call"
and "Latest Intellegence"?-PJB