|
Author
|
|
Topic: scanner freq.s for possible chem-sprayers | Topic page views:
|
|
Dave Gale
New Member
Mountain City,TN USA
6 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-12-2002 02:23 PM
  
Anybody in the NW N.C., SW Va.,NE Tn. area who has a scanner that covers 225-400 Mhz can hear air to air conversations between tankers and other aircraft on 235.100. also check 11.175 and 11.232 Usb on shortwave.
|
Thermit
Tech
Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 07-12-2002 03:23 PM
Hi Dave. Have you heard anything interesting?
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-15-2002 10:58 PM
Try the following frequencies on your scanner:255.4 282.8 122.2 122.6 122.8
|
Thermit
Tech
Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 07-16-2002 10:12 AM
What are those frequencies?
|
PHANTOM911
Senior Member
341 posts, Oct 2001
|
posted 07-16-2002 04:53 PM
Consider the source.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-16-2002 06:40 PM
Are you saying they aren't legit frequencies used by air traffic? Do your research, Phantom.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-17-2002 11:32 PM
Since no one bothered to look them up:255.4: UHF Flight Service Station common freq. 282.8: Alternate Guard freq. 122.2: VHF FlightWatch freq. 122.6: VHF Flight Service Station common freq. 122.8: UNICOM
|
Alpha-Theta
Superior
ª×µ»ƒ³²²
694 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 12:24 AM
Pacer, you know as well as I do that any covert communications would be encrypted, and would not be broadcast on these frequencies. Sheesh. Give me a break.
|
Dave Gale
New Member
Mountain City,TN USA
6 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 07:59 AM
When I posted the subject of POSSIBLE scanner freq.s for c-trailers I was looking for anyone else who might have more knowledge and confirmed these or other freq.s so far its produced insults and my sincerity questioned. We got enough to deal with and not enough people to effectively resist these problems so lets work together and find solutions not attack each other. If you know the answers let us in on them but never question my sincerity or honesty or patriotism!!!
|
Thermit
Tech
Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 07-18-2002 10:33 AM
quote:
my sincerity questioned
I believe that was Phantom911 questioning PacerLJ35, not you, Dave Gale.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 05:50 PM
I figured the scanner community would get something to listen to on those frequencies. Thanks Alpha, for pointing out the obvious. No, a "secret" operation isn't going to communicate on a common frequency that all the other aircraft are using.There are a number of ways to communicate without letting anyone listen it. Encryption is one, but that's a slower process. There's also channel-hopping. Anyways, even if the aircraft is conduction a secret operation, they have to have a way to talk to the ARTCC controllers and the tower and approach/departure controllers too. And those frequencies aren't secure.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 05:53 PM
Here's an interesting list of most of the military callsigns out there. This guy has done a great job compiling them. Although some of the information is a bit dated, it's pretty accurate overall. Some of the unit designations may have changed slightly. For example, it's got our callsign, Pacer, listed still as a C-21 callsign, but it's user, the 1402nd MAS no longer exists. It's now the 457th AS.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 05:55 PM
I guess it would be helpful to actually post the link!
http://www.the-guide.nl/callsign/ PS- I was also suprised to find they had the JOSA callsign!
|
David
Chemtrail Information Agent
1290 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 07-18-2002 06:29 PM
The airforce is keeping an eye on you pacer."Criticize me if you like, but DO NOT take my quotes and say they are "USAF lies". I may be in the Air Force, but I am NOT an Air Force spokesperson. Let me make myself perfectly clear: My posts are of my own opinion, and not official USAF sentiments in any way. I don't know WHAT you were trying to do there...perhaps get me in trouble? It doesn't matter whether what I say is true, not true, or simply incorrect...but you running around saying that I'm speaking on behalf of the Air Force would result in the perception existing that I am using my office as a PR tool. The times I have mentioned that I fly for the Air Force have been for background information only, NOT to insinuate that I'm some kind of "unofficial" spokesman for the military"
Hmmmmmm, you better hope THEY feel the same way otherwise your new call sign might be Prisoner #___________. 
[Edited 4 times, lastly by David on 07-18-2002]
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 07:16 PM
Oh, go away David. I'm sure they would get upset because I posted some frequencies that nearly every pilot in the US knows by memory. Not.
|
Alpha-Theta
Superior
ª×µ»ƒ³²²
694 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 08:04 PM
Is it accurate that the protocol and procedure for every operation is exactly the same Pacer? I am just curious because you state that all aircraft have to have a way to talk to the ARTCC controllers. I don't know if that is quite accurate. I'll leave that for you to decide with your best judgement. I am sure there are other methodologies of organisation and appropriation of air space, when dealing with certain types of operations. I feel like the terms non-differential and pacific command are highly relevant here. Of course, Milstar is probably only a figment of my imagination as well, right? Let's entertain the thought that a suspected chemtrail jet was captured communicating with approach. There still would be no way to distinguish that this particualr craft was involved in such operations.
|
PacerLJ35
Senior Member
Millbrook, AL, USA
456 posts, Apr 2002
|
posted 07-18-2002 09:07 PM
The problem with not communicating with ARTCC is that ARTCC controllers will talk to each other over the land line to develop a sequencing plan. Some rogue aircraft plowing through their airspace would create havoc, and would present a certain danger.Even when I did operate in a military operations area, we still talked with Houston Center. The idea that controllers can simply "clear the way" for some strange formation of military aircraft is a stretch. Even if a controller told me to descend out of my normal cruising altitude, they have to tell my why they are doing something out of the ordinary. They just can't say "descend and maintain..." just out of left field, leaving us wondering why. For those of you with ideas that the military launches the fleet, doesn't talk to anyone except their own command structure, and goes sailing through the national airspace system, you obviously don't appreciate how complicated it is to keep all of that flowing even with everyone talking to each other.
|
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
