Boston Marathon 2013

[eme]

I think the practical answer is that police scanners broadcast on ordinary frequencies using ordinary radios. There's frequently talk about moving to digital frequencies but (as I understand it) digital doesn't work well for anything but person-to-person communications and digital creates other problems when multiple agencies have to work with one another.

There's no reason why encrypted digital communications couldn't be used for broadcast purposes. You are receiving encrypted broadcast data watching TV everyday (assuming you have cable or satellite TV). I expect it's just a cost issue.

"doesn't work well" was too short. I should have said "is very complicated" which leads into exactly what you said (cost) as well as reliability.

It all comes down to money and the political will to spend it. Converting the whole Emergency Services for a city (Police, Fire, EMS) to digital is very expensive. Digital communications are encrypted and not accessible by the average person with a scanner.

From a security standpoint, it would require converting all three services as they work in conjunction with each other and share information, so cheaping out and just equipping the police would not work.

[ceileigh]

And in Toronto a potential terrorist attack on VIA rail was diverted today ...

Maybe we should be listening to those scanners too

[turd ferguson]

I think the practical answer is that police scanners broadcast on ordinary frequencies using ordinary radios. There's frequently talk about moving to digital frequencies but (as I understand it) digital doesn't work well for anything but person-to-person communications and digital creates other problems when multiple agencies have to work with one another.

There's no reason why encrypted digital communications couldn't be used for broadcast purposes. You are receiving encrypted broadcast data watching TV everyday (assuming you have cable or satellite TV). I expect it's just a cost issue.

"doesn't work well" was too short. I should have said "is very complicated" which leads into exactly what you said (cost) as well as reliability.

It all comes down to money and the political will to spend it. Converting the whole Emergency Services for a city (Police, Fire, EMS) to digital is very expensive. Digital communications are encrypted and not accessible by the average person with a scanner.

From a security standpoint, it would require converting all three services as they work in conjunction with each other and share information, so cheaping out and just equipping the police would not work.

Its worse than that because in most places there are a lot more than three agencies (i.e. city and rural, sheriffs, RCMP, etc) plus other governmental agencies (CBSA, environment...) as well as non-governmental responders (pipelines and utilities).

[deerdree]

I think the practical answer is that police scanners broadcast on ordinary frequencies using ordinary radios. There's frequently talk about moving to digital frequencies but (as I understand it) digital doesn't work well for anything but person-to-person communications and digital creates other problems when multiple agencies have to work with one another.

There's no reason why encrypted digital communications couldn't be used for broadcast purposes. You are receiving encrypted broadcast data watching TV everyday (assuming you have cable or satellite TV). I expect it's just a cost issue.

"doesn't work well" was too short. I should have said "is very complicated" which leads into exactly what you said (cost) as well as reliability.

It all comes down to money and the political will to spend it. Converting the whole Emergency Services for a city (Police, Fire, EMS) to digital is very expensive. Digital communications are encrypted and not accessible by the average person with a scanner.

From a security standpoint, it would require converting all three services as they work in conjunction with each other and share information, so cheaping out and just equipping the police would not work.

this is why i laughed when i read about hamilton's shift last year:

It was more important for police than other users that the system be encrypted.

“The encryption for the rest of the city is secondary,” Kay said.

EMS, however, uses a separate non-encrypted radio system that is paid for and run by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, said Doug Waugh, a manager with Hamilton Emergency Services.

This system will continue to operate as is, although Waugh said he would welcome encryption to protect private patient information.

When paramedics need to update police or fire on a situation, they call into dispatch and dispatch passes over the information, or they use cellphones.

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/artic ... -go-silent

(i used to listen to the scanners a lot when i first started my thesis)

[Jo-Jo]

I think the practical answer is that police scanners broadcast on ordinary frequencies using ordinary radios. There's frequently talk about moving to digital frequencies but (as I understand it) digital doesn't work well for anything but person-to-person communications and digital creates other problems when multiple agencies have to work with one another.

There's no reason why encrypted digital communications couldn't be used for broadcast purposes. You are receiving encrypted broadcast data watching TV everyday (assuming you have cable or satellite TV). I expect it's just a cost issue.

"doesn't work well" was too short. I should have said "is very complicated" which leads into exactly what you said (cost) as well as reliability.

It all comes down to money and the political will to spend it. Converting the whole Emergency Services for a city (Police, Fire, EMS) to digital is very expensive. Digital communications are encrypted and not accessible by the average person with a scanner.

From a security standpoint, it would require converting all three services as they work in conjunction with each other and share information, so cheaping out and just equipping the police would not work.

Its worse than that because in most places there are a lot more than three agencies (i.e. city and rural, sheriffs, RCMP, etc) plus other governmental agencies (CBSA, environment...) as well as non-governmental responders (pipelines and utilities).

Thanks Mike for taking the time to respond to this.
I won't have to bother Steve with this query...I'm already about to bother him with another query about something

[La]

And now all the conspiracy theories about how the brothers weren't the real bombers and how the FBI covered the whole thing up are coming out.

[bruyere]

And now all the conspiracy theories about how the brothers weren't the real bombers and how the FBI covered the whole thing up are coming out.

Oh, they've been out since pretty much the day after. Things like photos that folks claim show the Sandy Hook principal, who was killed in Newtown, and the claim that the 27-year-old male victim who had his lower legs amputated (the one who woke and told how the bomber looked at him as he placed the backpack) is really a war veteran.

It's all rather sad.

As for the scanner and police requests to not tweet information - one thing to note, as far as I know, anyway, is that the police were simply asking to not broadcast their location or details about where they were. They weren't saying people should stop listening or share nothing.

[bruyere]

Thought some of you might like reading/listening to some of this:

One week ago — at approximately 2:50 p.m. on Monday, just over four hours into the race — the first of two bombs exploded near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. This image, taken from the NBC broadcast of the race, shows the flash of the explosion and the final split-second of normalcy before the area turned into what witnesses described as a war zone. Here are the stories of the runners and spectators seen in this image.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013 ... .html?_r=0

[La]

I saw that last night. Very interesting perspectives.

[HCcD]

Saw the interview on CNN this morning ...

Note from Adrianne Haslet-Davis, a spectator who lost part of her leg in the Boston Marathon bombings: “I can’t let some (expletive) come along and steal my whole life. Next year … yes, I plan to run the marathon.”

http://www.sportsgrid.com/inspirational-things/dancer-who-lost-her-foot-in-boston-marathon-attack-vows-to-run-in-next-years-race/

[n_fraser]

Saw the interview on CNN this morning ...

Note from Adrianne Haslet-Davis, a spectator who lost part of her leg in the Boston Marathon bombings: “I can’t let some (expletive) come along and steal my whole life. Next year … yes, I plan to run the marathon.”

http://www.sportsgrid.com/inspirational-things/dancer-who-lost-her-foot-in-boston-marathon-attack-vows-to-run-in-next-years-race/

This is very inspiring to me.

[Spirit Unleashed]

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/new ... d-20130717

[Spirit Unleashed]

I just read the whole article. Very interesting.