So I stumbled across this on X just an interesting data point

a reply to: putnam6

Well, it was revealed that Hunter Biden had a financial piece of that Chinese balloon pie. That explains why nobody in this administration did crap about it, as well as why nothing was revealed about the ones shot down.

a reply to: putnam6

Most Firstnet implementations do not allow for communications across different RF bands. Firstnet allows, for example, Motorola trunked radio systems to communicate with L3 Harris trunked radio systems (both of which use proprietary trunking and encryption protocols), BUT both of these Public Radio systems operate in the same band (UHF, specifically the "800MHz band"). Federal government radios operate down in the VHF band in several areas depending on what branch and department (often around 160-170MHz and 400-420MHz, etc.) These radio bands require different transceivers from the UHF band (not to mention different antennas), so unless these systems are translated to some other (3rd) medium of communication then they are not interoperable. While something like this would be technically possible, it would involve another piece of hardware both at the headend of each user and at the far (user) end at each radio. I've not seen an implementation like this, if they exist at all.

Firstnet and Stargate were two of the earlier attempts at solving these problems. I don't think Stargate is even a thing now. Later, the P-25 encryption standarization was developed to eliminate some of the proprietary encryption issues, but this does not address vastly different areas of the RF spectrum (only just the encryption used on nearby frequencies).

edit - I have seen some Firstnet systems which will permit comms across two different areas of the same band. Say for example 800MHz and 900MHz, but even in this case both 800MHz and 900MHz are in the same UHF band. Where this has happened, the receivers and field radios have to be capable of operating within both bands. This is pretty unusual because the costs of the individual radios increase by 2x or more. When you're talking about an agency which has thousands, and in some cases tens of thousands, of radios which need to be replaced every 4-5 years, you're talking about a huge budgetary hit for agencies.

We're not talking about radios which cost $100 bucks here either; most Public Safety handheld radios, when fully equipped, are around $700 to $1200 each. If you suddenly double this number (or more) you can imagine the budgetary implications. And, because this would be a discretionary expenditure and not a mission-critical one, you can see why this would be something which would easily be cut by local agencies. We have about 15,000 radios in circulation where I am. 15,000 radios x $1200 per radio = $18,000,000. If you double this number, it's $36m...and that's an every 4-5 year recurring cost.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: putnam6
So I stumbled across this on X, an amazing coincidence since there were reportedly problems with the radio communications.

From a couple of videos I posted about, there was an SS agent outside the building Crooks was on minutes before the first shot. The incompatible radio thing would not have applied. This guy was seeing what was going on and could have notified directly.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You could be right, I thought the acting Director of the USSS semi-addressed that in one of the hearings, he insinuated they were responding after Crooks was determined to be a threat, but this was just minutes before. It took forever from when Crooks was noticed to when he was identified as a possible threat to him being shot after shooting.

There was an obvious miscommunication in that time frame.

Regardless lay out your theory, as Ive stated Im trying to catch up...from what I garnered from your link you think Trump staged it all?

Did I read that correctly?

this I got to hear.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: putnam6

Most Firstnet implementations do not allow for communications across different RF bands. Firstnet allows, for example, Motorola trunked radio systems to communicate with L3 Harris trunked radio systems (both of which use proprietary trunking and encryption protocols), BUT both of these Public Radio systems operate in the same band (UHF, specifically the "800MHz band"). Federal government radios operate down in the VHF band in several areas depending on what branch and department (often around 160-170MHz and 400-420MHz, etc.) These radio bands require different transceivers from the UHF band (not to mention different antennas), so unless these systems are translated to some other (3rd) medium of communication then they are not interoperable. While something like this would be technically possible, it would involve another piece of hardware both at the headend of each user and at the far (user) end at each radio. I've not seen an implementation like this, if they exist at all.

Firstnet and Stargate were two of the earlier attempts at solving these problems. I don't think Stargate is even a thing now. Later, the P-25 encryption standarization was developed to eliminate some of the proprietary encryption issues, but this does not address vastly different areas of the RF spectrum (only just the encryption used on nearby frequencies).

edit - I have seen some Firstnet systems which will permit comms across two different areas of the same band. Say for example 800MHz and 900MHz, but even in this case both 800MHz and 900MHz are in the same UHF band. Where this has happened, the receivers and field radios have to be capable of operating within both bands. This is pretty unusual because the costs of the individual radios increase by 2x or more. When you're talking about an agency which has thousands, and in some cases tens of thousands, of radios which need to be replaced every 4-5 years, you're talking about a huge budgetary hit for agencies.

We're not talking about radios which cost $100 bucks here either; most Public Safety handheld radios, when fully equipped, are around $700 to $1200 each. If you suddenly double this number (or more) you can imagine the budgetary implications. And, because this would be a discretionary expenditure and not a mission-critical one, you can see why this would be something which would easily be cut by local agencies. We have about 15,000 radios in circulation where I am. 15,000 radios x $1200 per radio = $18,000,000. If you double this number, it's $36m...and that's an every 4-5 year recurring cost.

Yes, I mentioned the budgetary concerns a smaller county like Butler could have.

Still so what you are saying is one of the known failure points from 9/11 the lack of cross-agency communications still exists 23 years later, as well as First Net's network statement being false or it wasn't implemented or used in Butler because of budgetary concerns.
Even though First Net is operational in Pennsylvania unless a department has the right equipment it's useless in those situations. I get it, but we are just talking about maybe 2 dozen radios needed in this particular situation. It's not like this was an emergency and they didn't know the departments would be interacting together, this was a planned event. So far in the only cross communications were the field team where there was a Police representative listening in with SS

So we had another failure in interdepartmental communication, which could be partly because according the Pennsylvania State Police the USSS did not meet with the whole PSD team just the contact and they were supposed to inform the rest of the detail of procedures




www.firstnet.gov...

The Network
FirstNet was created to be a force-multiplier for first responders — to give public safety the 21st century communication tools they need to help save lives and keep our communities safe. To realize that vision, the FirstNet Authority is directing the deployment of a high-speed network using public safety’s Band 14 spectrum. Built on commercial standards, the FirstNet network is resilient, interoperable, and able to provide optimal levels of operational capability during emergencies.

The network operates in all U.S. states, territories, and Washington, D.C., transforming emergency communications nationwide. FirstNet delivers the benefits of lower costs, consumer-driven economies of scale, and advanced communication capabilities to public safety personnel.

Public safety’s vision
The 9/11 terrorist attacks brought to the forefront the many communications challenges that first responders face during emergencies and disasters. These issues were captured in the 9/11 Commission Report, which identified gaps in emergency communications and recommended a nationwide network for law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical personnel communications. The public safety community united to fulfill the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation. Their vision and advocacy efforts led to the passage of legislation in 2012 to create a dedicated, reliable wireless network for first responders in all U.S. states and territories, including rural communities and tribal nations.

Built for public safety, by public safety
Public safety officials have worked closely with the FirstNet Authority since its inception to ensure the network meets first responders’ needs — today and in the future. Through ongoing outreach and consultation efforts, the FirstNet Authority has connected with first responders and state public safety and technology executives across the country, in every state, territory, and the District of Columbia. The FirstNet Authority also coordinates with public safety through the Public Safety Advisory Committee (PSAC), which provides guidance and subject matter expertise from a first responder perspective.

A dedicated, communications “fast lane” for public safety
The FirstNet network is helping connect first responders during major emergencies and at large events by providing a “fast lane” for their highly secure communications. FirstNet delivers specialized features to public safety that are not available on most commercial wireless networks today, such as priority access, preemption, more network capacity, and a resilient, hardened connection.

Helping public safety save lives
FirstNet is improving communications for first responders in rural and urban areas, leading to safer, more secure communities. With FirstNet, public safety can take advantage of advanced technologies, tools, and services during emergencies, such as:

Applications that allow first responders to share videos, text messages, photos and other information in near real-time
Devices configured to meet the focused needs of public safety
Improved location services to help with mapping capabilities during rescue and recovery operations
Deployables available for planned and unplanned emergency events
The FirstNet Authority oversees the testing and validation of the network and related products and services, ensuring first responders have the proven tools they need in disasters and emergencies. Through our Boulder FirstNet Lab in Colorado, we are testing capabilities unique to public safety and exploring innovative technologies for their future communications needs.

a reply to: putnam6

Yes, that is what I am saying (in a nutshell).

As I noted earlier, Firstnet type technology helps local agencies with interoperability, but the federal government has largely removed themselves from these requirements because they're "more important". Notice nowhere in any of that fancy advertising do you see anything about the ability of communicating across different RF bands without needing a 3rd device to serve as an intermediary? This is what I'm talking about. And that 3rd device rarely exists.

BUT, there's actually a larger problem here. I say this because these issues have been known about for a long time. It's not some problem which cropped up on the 12th of July, AND there were ways they 'could' have mitigated some of these problems. So, the bigger problem is...they DIDN'T mitigate these long-known issues ahead of time.

They 'could' have done things like better coordination with local and federal resources. They 'could' have developed alternatives to communications gaps. They 'could' have done a whole lot of things which they DIDN'T do. For example, something as simple as a jointly manned command center with comms from all agencies coming into one central point. Did they do this? Nope! Each had their own command center. Oh sure, they probably exchanged numbers in case things got hot, but they were completely blind in terms of real-time situational awareness between the various agencies. That's a huge failure. And why was this? Likely because the SS felt they were far too important to share intel with the lowly locals, and having the lowly locals being able to see their sophisticated operations would not be 'cool'.

We can't forget that part of this failure was about egos and people feeling superior to other people. That's not teamwork, and really that's the biggest failure here (at least for the people who weren't active participants in some assassination conspiracy if one existed.)

edit - BTW, notice how they (Firstnet) throws out fancy words like "LTE technology"? Do you know what this means? It generally means things like cellular phone technology. These are the types of '3rd' intermediary devices I am referring to above. This is all fine and good IF everyone gets their devices communicating with one another AHEAD of time. Has nothing to do with radios, but rather exchanging cell phone contact data with everyone, creating distribution lists so messages get broadcast across numerous devices by one person. Bottom line..."coordination" which was NOT done. Inexcusable!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Thanks for the clarification, as a salesman the one thing I could identify was the slick emphasis on the positives and ignoring the negatives.

The part pretty much no one can get around is the time difference from when the people saw Crooks before he got on the roof and somebody had eyes on him and then lost him and then spectators in the area were yelling he is on the roof and made it known, didn't some say he had gun?

Completely inexcusable and incompetent so much so, it's perfectly natural to question the credibility of the 20 year old lone autistic dweeby gunman.

originally posted by: putnam6
There was an obvious miscommunication in that time frame.

The SS agent posted outside the building would have heard people yelling he has a gun and he would have direct contact with other SS agents. Why would there have been miscommunication?

Regardless lay out your theory, as Ive stated Im trying to catch up...from what I garnered from your link you think Trump staged it all?

Did I read that correctly?

this I got to hear.

It is in the thread I linked to. No point in repeating it. "It" certainly was allowed to happen but what we don't know is what is "it"?

This was either planned or allowed. Allowing it is to random. Simply leaving security gaps does not mean there will be someone to take advantage of the error. So I lean to planned.

I've spent time in certain protective details. The cascading failures are ridiculous. Radio system questions are red herrings. SS allows vetted locals around the edges, but they are the authority here. Trump is one of the biggest high value targets in the US.

An unsecured roof top, with a line of sight would never be allowed unless it was intentionally planned. Very convenient it was beyond the secure zone, yet close enough for a pretty easy shot.

The federal budget could allow for issuing compatible trunked radios to at least local LEO command staff and is cheap. Some sensors on that roof or a SS agent is easy.

Did the SS grow complacent because nothing happens? That is incomprehensible. ATS has been talking about a likely attempt for a long time.

Protection is about anticipation and staying "ON". That is why staff rotations are a thing.

The whole thing stinks and they are shoveling stuff to hide what happened. We will never hear the truth.

originally posted by: putnam6
Crooks was seen and acknowledged as a potential threat in plenty of time. Damn that new video you could see his azz on the roof without binoculars, complete incompetence likely but it damn sure isn't certain.

Heck yes. There were people yelling and pointing to Crooks, trying to get the police and security to go look. Not a response. Why? Crooks wasn't even trying hard to hide either. It's kinda like he knew no one was going to stop him, hmmm... He needed a ladder to get up there. A ladder that he either openly brought with him in broad daylight, or that was sitting there waiting on him to use. If that's the case, a security walkabout prior to the start should have found this and taken it away as an obvious breach. That should have led to heightened vigilance.

My opinion is that this was a case of strategically looking the other way in a myriad of tiny ways and they were going to throw the police detail under the bus as a cover.

a reply to: putnam6

We just had different lives... I wish a lot of times that mine was mundane instead.

Which is why now in my later life I make it as mundane as possible.

Sometimes knowledge is a thing freely given that allows you to see your own personal world in a different way.

Other times knowledge is gained through pain and scars that make you different too.

I wish I was naive most of these current days now.

I instead calculate possibilities because that is what I do and I don't like what I'm seeing...

So my desire to remain sane is at odds with my ability to keep up with current events.

a reply to: putnam6

Here is a description, point blank, of exactly what I was talking about, almost down to the letter.

Communications Breakdown

Almost every single thing happened just as I described it. SS in a different command post, radios didn't communicate, little cell phone coverage, and ZERO coordination.

Shameful and inexcusable beyond description!

Bottom line...intentional.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: putnam6

Here is a description, point blank, of exactly what I was talking about, almost down to the letter.

Communications Breakdown

Almost every single thing happened just as I described it. SS in a different command post, radios didn't communicate, little cell phone coverage, and ZERO coordination.

Shameful and inexcusable beyond description!

Bottom line...intentional.

Yes, the more I watch and read, especially about Local Law enforcement, they are saying the same thing.

originally posted by: Albone
This was either planned or allowed. Allowing it is to random. Simply leaving security gaps does not mean there will be someone to take advantage of the error. So I lean to planned.

I've spent time in certain protective details. The cascading failures are ridiculous. Radio system questions are red herrings. SS allows vetted locals around the edges, but they are the authority here. Trump is one of the biggest high value targets in the US.

An unsecured roof top, with a line of sight would never be allowed unless it was intentionally planned. Very convenient it was beyond the secure zone, yet close enough for a pretty easy shot.

The federal budget could allow for issuing compatible trunked radios to at least local LEO command staff and is cheap. Some sensors on that roof or a SS agent is easy.

Did the SS grow complacent because nothing happens? That is incomprehensible. ATS has been talking about a likely attempt for a long time.

Protection is about anticipation and staying "ON". That is why staff rotations are a thing.

The whole thing stinks and they are shoveling stuff to hide what happened. We will never hear the truth.

That seems to be the game plan, run out the clock and stall. It is already fading from the headlines, It's as if they know collectively the general public will pay attention for a certain amount of time before they tire and it's on to something else.

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: putnam6

We just had different lives... I wish a lot of times that mine was mundane instead.

Which is why now in my later life I make it as mundane as possible.

Sometimes knowledge is a thing freely given that allows you to see your own personal world in a different way.

Other times knowledge is gained through pain and scars that make you different too.

I wish I was naive most of these current days now.

I instead calculate possibilities because that is what I do and I don't like what I'm seeing...

So my desire to remain sane is at odds with my ability to keep up with current events.

Yeah, one or two crossroads where I am not sure it would have been better just different. It's not the destination it's definitely the journey. Im good at what I do, but Im not going to give a piss about how many units I sold when Im in my 70s. But I aint dead yet either

It's only when TSHTF in the real world, that you go WTH, and the default view is no way. But there is a way, every one of these world-changing events, people made happen, some seem so bizarre they would be rejected for novel or movie. People would go there is no way a shooter got within 130 yards and was up high and had an open shot, among all the other "failures". As has been alluded to here in the thread, it's going to get whitewashed and forgotten. Have we ever had a Commission Report the general public believed? It's probably why they rush these hearings now thats all we will get.

Hell Kennedy was shot 10 months before I was born, so I know I didn't do it, but we aren't any closer to getting answers there either. What full release pushed back to 2050, LOL Id be Biden's age.

The hearings and interviews on Butler all seem like window-dressing, going through the motions