PDA

View Full Version : L.E.S - Law Enforcement System-Sperry mainframe Computer



Sims
21-12-2009, 03:05 PM
I am trying to locate someone with L.E.S knowledge- Law Enforcement System-Sperry mainframe, used by the New Zealand Police from 1976 to the mid 2000s.

Can you assist, or recommend anyone.

thankyou.

regards,
Sims

Sims
21-12-2009, 03:08 PM
I am trying to locate someone with L.E.S knowledge- Law Enforcement System-Sperry mainframe, used by the New Zealand Police from 1976 to the mid 2000s.

Can you assist, or recommend anyone.

thankyou.

regards,
Sims

Sweep
21-12-2009, 03:40 PM
I used to use a terminal linked to the Wanganui Computer if that is the one you are talking about.

Speedy Gonzales
21-12-2009, 03:40 PM
Umm yup, what were you wanting to know?? I was an operator from around 1991 till they stopped using it. Yup, thats it Sweep - Wanganui computer aka LES. It was also used by the Courts and Probation service. Its kind of still around, but its in-house. Probation and the courts can still access it. But, its no longer in B&W

Speedy Gonzales
21-12-2009, 03:49 PM
You've already posted a thread (http://pressf1.co.nz/showthread.php?t=105980)

jinja_thom
21-12-2009, 03:56 PM
Try here http://www.oldfriends.co.nz/Institution.aspx?id=13970

jinja_thom
21-12-2009, 03:58 PM
Try here http://www.oldfriends.co.nz/Institution.aspx?id=13970

Sims
17-02-2010, 11:49 AM
thanks to all of you for your help on that one, i will chase up those leads.
cheers

Sims

Sims
24-02-2010, 11:37 AM
TO: Speedy Gonzales, jinja thom, Sweep,

I have some specific questions to ask, including documents relating to those questions.

Any chance of me emailing them or P.m.ing these questions & documents to you?

I dont seem to be able to P.M you guys??

cheers,
Sims

Speedy Gonzales
24-02-2010, 11:38 AM
You need 10 posts to PM someone

documents like what?

Sweep
24-02-2010, 11:39 AM
I think you have to have 10 posts before you can PM.

Sims
25-02-2010, 10:32 AM
howdy,

it's a switch message printout with a terminal identity transaction tag, that I am trying to authenticate.

cheers

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 10:36 AM
So, whats the ID of the terminal? And how did you get it?

Sims
25-02-2010, 11:11 AM
Speedy Gonzales, jinja thom, Sweep:

Re the terminal identity transaction tags listed at the foot of the switch message printouts,

Which ones the real one/s & which one/s the fake one & why?


OHPWA 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWAB 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWA1 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWA2 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL


RE your question, got them from a friend who has become frustrated around the whole issue.

Sweep
25-02-2010, 11:20 AM
I believe that only the first string is valid.

Sims
25-02-2010, 11:29 AM
Sweep, why is that?

Would there be any situation in which if I sent a switch message from terminal identity OHPWA that it would or could create a 'string' [terminal transaction identity tag] in the form of the other strings i have posted?

thanks

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 01:00 PM
The rest is the date and time ack means it was sent. Why would your mate be frustrated over this? And how would you send from OHPWA, you would have to be there, and near a terminal. Thats all, you'll see. And whatever the message is below it. Looks like that message was sent from one terminal to 4 other terminals at the same time on the same day

Sims
25-02-2010, 01:15 PM
I appreciate your feedback.

Yes, the switch message is claimed to have been sent from the location of the terminal identifier. My friend believes it wasn't.

I am trying to find out if the terminal identifier in each string is legitimate or not.

Is there any action on a terminal, say WNPWA for example, that would result in the transaction identity tag for terminal WNPWA adding a B or a 1 or a 2
onto the end of that terminal identifier WNPWA, if WNPWA was sending a switch message?

Sims
25-02-2010, 01:30 PM
trying to explain this...

OHPWA is a legitimate terminal identifier for the Otahuhu Watch House.

WNPWA is a legitimate terminal identifier for the Wellington Watch House.

If OHPWA sent a switch message to WNPWA, is there anything which might generate a
B or a 1 or a 2, onto the end of OHPWA's transaction identity tag-as in those examples I posted?

e.gs:


OHPWA 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWAB 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWA1 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

OHPWA2 0007 22/01/93 09 : 16 : 18 ACK DL

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 01:41 PM
Well, I know theyre legit terminals. That 1, 2 or B just means there's more than 1 terminal in that area. Thats why there's OHPWA, 1, 2 and B. The operator who is sending it, would put 1, 2 or B on the message

Sims
25-02-2010, 01:52 PM
okay then, what if there was only one terminal in the Otahuhu watch house & that was terminal identifier OHPWA, could OHPWA send a switch message to WNPWA, & that switch message produce a transaction identity tag of

OHPWAB

or

OHPWA1

or

OHPWA2

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 01:54 PM
No if it was sent from OHPWA, then it'll show OHPWA. The terminal has to exist, before you can either send from it or send to it

Sweep
25-02-2010, 01:54 PM
Hmmmmmm. I don't think OHPWAB WA1 or WA2 are legit terminals. But OHPWB is valid for example.

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 01:59 PM
They may have been in 1993. They may not be now, Since Otahuhu court doesnt exist

Sweep
25-02-2010, 02:12 PM
What, may I ask, has the Otahuhu Court got to do with the problem?

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 02:14 PM
Well some of those terminals may have been in it thats why. And since it doesnt exist now those terminals may not exist either

Sims
25-02-2010, 02:24 PM
Is there an explanation for OHPWAB in the transaction tag then in terms of
the B in OHPWAB referring to a backscreen?

I am looking along the lines of whether or not the Wanganui computer terminals in 1993, had an ability to switch between two windows on a screen, the equivalent of using 2 windows on a modern computer?

Could the B being attached the terminal identifier OHPWA be indicative of the switch message being sent in this mode, from a back screen?

Sweep
25-02-2010, 02:24 PM
A terminal identified as OHPWA was located in the Police watch house in Otahuhu.

A terminal identified as WNTRA was located in the MOT building in Wellington.

So the first four letters give Location and entity and the last letter identifies the specific terminal.

I would not have a clue where the terminals reside at this time or even if any survive.

Sims
25-02-2010, 02:26 PM
What, may I ask, has the Otahuhu Court got to do with the problem?



The OH part refers to Otahuhu, the location, not the Otahuhu Court.

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 02:27 PM
Is there an explanation for OHPWAB in the transaction tag then in terms of
the B in OHPWAB referring to a backscreen?

I am looking along the lines of whether or not the Wanganui computer terminals in 1993, had an ability to switch between two windows on a screen, the equivalent of using 2 windows on a modern computer?

Could the B being attached the terminal identifier OHPWA be indicative of the switch message being sent in this mode, from a back screen?

You could be right it did have 2 screens, so the B may well mean the back screen. Most terminal ID's were only 5 letters, or 3 letters and a number (IIRC)

Sims
25-02-2010, 02:28 PM
I am wondering if the 'B' in OHPWAB tag/string is referring to the use of a backscreen or second screen to the terminal OHPWA to send the switch message.

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 02:33 PM
Probably a back screen / not a 2nd screen. You would only have a 2nd screen, if there were more than 1 terminal in the building. And since it was B&W at the time, 1 screen to look at was bad enough

Sims
25-02-2010, 02:37 PM
So could the front & back screens send & receive their own switch messages then?

And if they could, would there be a resultant identifying feature in the string/tag providing a record of the individual screen having carried out the switch message transaction?

Would OHPWAB indicate that the switch message was sent from terminal OHPWA via one of the two screens?

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 02:41 PM
B would meant it was sent from the 2nd screen yes. I'm pretty sure you could send from both. I did it myself

OHPWA would be from the main screen B would be from the 2nd screen. I could probably check one day since it does still exist. Its just not in B&W. And people can still access it via a normal computer

Sims
25-02-2010, 02:53 PM
thanks for that, must have had everyone scratching their heads..so long ago.

I have heard that individual terminal operators complain how easy the old system was compared to the new one, when it came to hands on. The old system apparently had a whole heap of pre-format screens & you just filled out the blank spaces.


Might have been a case of change for change sake, cost a heap the change after I.B.M pulled out.

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 03:01 PM
True, there were / are a lot of screens, but it depends on what you want to do. And what department you're with. On what you have access to. Different depts have different levels of access to different options / screens. ie: Anyone who works in the courts wouldn't have access to the same screens as say Probation would have and vice versa. Because they have no need to use it, and it has nothing to do with their line of work

Sims
25-02-2010, 03:10 PM
thanks, & much appreciated.

I will pass all that info provided by you guys onto my friend.

Speedy Gonzales
25-02-2010, 03:13 PM
Sweet

Uncle
26-02-2010, 06:59 PM
would the second screen become OHPWAB or would it be OHPWB, I cant see how 6 letters would become the Terminal ID,I am of the understanding that operator requests could only be made from the “front” screen, eg. OHPWA. would special types of output such as “Force Print” do you think it would automatically directed to the “back” screen or “B” screen

Speedy Gonzales
26-02-2010, 07:31 PM
AB, like I said most terminal ID's were only 5 letters. Well if you know operator requests could only be made on the front screen, why are you asking? Its been a while since I've actually used it. Since it hasnt been around for the last 4-5+ yrs. Does it really matter IF it was OHPWA or OHPWAB? Since it'll still be from the same office. Even tho it is still around now, its no longer B&W. And its in colour (in some depts).

And at least you can use a mouse. Dont know about the Police, its probably the same.

Sweep
26-02-2010, 07:36 PM
All I can say is that back in 1980 when I worked for the MOT there were 5 terminals in the office. WNTRA B C D and E.

WN stands for Wellngton TR means Transport and the last letter identifies the specific terminal.

There were a number of screens I could call up depending on what I was doing. We used to update drivers licence details and also keep track of what enforcement officers had been doing.

I used to regularly communicate with terminals in the Police Dept where if someone had filled in a change of address for their drivers licence and there was a warrant out then the new address would be passed on.

As far as I remember it there was never a "back" screen as such and all terminals I came across had a five letter identifier.

Bear in mind too, at that time I had previously been working as a programmer for the Waterfront Industry Commission writing comms software for the Burroughs TC500 in assembler so I had a background of computing.

Speedy Gonzales
26-02-2010, 07:40 PM
There WAS a back screen when I used it (from 1991 - when it was decommissioned - 2004 or something). Dont know about the 1980's I wasnt employed then. I was still at school !

Uncle
28-02-2010, 04:35 PM
I have managed to find this information regarding TERMINAL OHPWA and the B screen OHAWB.I am told that some Special types of output such as force print were automatically directed to the Back screen or "B" screen, OHPWB.

There was only one Computer terminal ID "OHPWA" so the Terminal OHPWAB needs some explanation, I doubt this is a genuine Message it cannot be sent as there is 6 letters for the ID Tag, I doubt that it originates from the legal source


I have not being able to find out whether matrix Dot Force Print was in use back in 1993 this may help with this documents authenticity

Uncle
28-02-2010, 04:39 PM
I have managed to find this information regarding TERMINAL OHPWA and the B screen OHPWB.

There was only one Computer terminal ID "OHPWA" so the Terminal OHPWAB needs some explanation, I doubt this is a genuine Message it cannot be sent as there is 6 letters for the ID Tag, I doubt that it originates from the legal source

I have not being able to find out whether matrix Dot Force Print was in use back in 1993 this may help with this documents authenticity

Speedy Gonzales
28-02-2010, 04:46 PM
Dot matrix printers were used back then. Till the mid 2000's. Now they use lasers. The paper you used back then, had holes on the side of it..Thats how the paper was fed through the printer

Sims
02-03-2010, 10:38 PM
Dot Matrix Force print all new for me, should this document be made up of dots and should these Dots be quite clear to see.
Would the Dots still be clear even after the Document has been photo copied.
Do you know if a document such as this was to be printed off from any Terminal in NZ would they all have the same Characteristic's, fonts and the outlay of the Template Etc , wonder now myself about the source this come from

Thank you for your assistance.

Cheers

Speedy Gonzales
02-03-2010, 10:41 PM
Probably used the same kind printer, and paper. Dont know about the police tho. Never worked there. The printing had to be clear, what was printed was given to the courts. No point using the printer, if you couldnt see what was printed

Sweep
02-03-2010, 10:55 PM
I somehow doubt that the dots would show up all that well if photocopied and I think the terminal ID is very suspect.

zqwerty
02-03-2010, 11:03 PM
On our old Win98SE computer, still used everyday we have a top of the line dot matrix printer, it is very fast and gives a very legible output on standard A4 paper.

Uncle
03-03-2010, 06:43 PM
This OHPWAB is annoying,and there is some thing wrong, I have been told this these are not my words anyone agree's with the statement, I dont!.TheWanganui Computer Centre terminals operating in the days before the Windows programme had a facility for operating in “Bypass” mode, the equivalent of using two windows on a modern computer using a windows programme.

Each screen, OHPWA and OHPWAB, could accept and receive their own requests and responses from the LES system. Each screen on the one terminal operated independently of the other. When operating in “DUAL” mode responses were sent back to the screen they originated from. This includes “force print” outputs which queued to the requesting screen.

Functionally, DUAL mode was the same as having two “screens” in different parts of the room. Each “screen” could send and receive requests and responses independently of the other.

I am advised that operator requests could only be made from the “front” screen, eg. OHPWA. However, special types of output were automatically directed to the “back” screen or “B” screen, eg. OHPWAB. These responses would automatically route through to the attached printer and print without any operator intervention.

What I was then told is,; Terminal OHPWAB refers to terminal OHPWA operating in “bypass” mode. OHPWAB is not a separate terminal and therefore does not have a second screen. OHPWAB was the “second” screen on the OHPWA terminal. personally I do not believe this, I have seen with my own eyes a document that had a Terminal ID Tag OHPWB

Speedy Gonzales
03-03-2010, 07:00 PM
Well go to the cops and ask them. I would go and check but they run a script that gets the info from the WC. And most of it is windows based now. And all they have to do now is type in someone's name, and it comes up with whatever

Sims
04-03-2010, 09:53 AM
nice debate we are having here. Here's my 2 cents worth!

I believe that all the preformat switch messages e.g *DRUGS, *MODA, *FIRE, all operated in FORCED PRINT MODE whereby, if the boxes were all filled in correctly-the required fields, the Wanganui System would accept the switch message from the sender terminal, & force print a record of the switch message sent at the sender terminal, to the Wanganui Mainframe, via the dot matrix printer.

Sims
04-03-2010, 09:58 AM
I dont know about this OHPWA versus OHPWAB thing.

I'd assume that given that the switch message is sent by OHPWA that that's all that would be displayed on any forced print printout of that switch message transaction??

Does a forced print i.e, one that is generated automatically, tag the printout with the screen it was sent from??

Sims
04-03-2010, 10:11 AM
I think the solution to this question is in the nature of the switch message being a FORCED PRINT.

ALL the *FIRE, *MODA, * DRUGS are forced print-they print out automatically off the sending terminal printer, from the terminal sending the switch message.

At the receiving end of the switch message, the receivers terminal automatically prints off that *MODA for e.g, as well.

I do not believe anyone will be able to find a legitimate switch message in an *moda or *FIRE or *DRUGS that shows a 6 character identity, i.e OHPWA versus OHPWAB other than those which are fakes?

Sweep
04-03-2010, 10:12 AM
As I have previously mentioned all the terminals I have seen or communicated with or got messages from had a five character ID.

Speedy Gonzales
04-03-2010, 11:01 AM
Well fire and drugs arent valid ID's anyway. And printing was automatic. It printed whatever message out, if you werent logged in, and on the terminal. But if you were at the terminal (and logged in), you would print the message out.

And when you send a message, you would print the message out (it doesnt print automatically). And yer it shows the sending terminal on the top of the message / prints whatever terminal when the other end receives it (obviously, they need to know WHERE the message came from)

Sweep
04-03-2010, 11:10 AM
Fire, Drugs are not valid IDs but are valid in terms of an ENQ.

Sims
04-03-2010, 11:25 AM
*FIRE, *DRUGS & *MODA were merely the preformat templates for their respective reports. required to be sent as per general instructions-G.Is.

Speedy Gonzales
04-03-2010, 11:28 AM
If you say so. I dont know, never used them