Blake, it depends on where you live.  I some areas, agencies still use 
conventional frequencies which to me makes a lot of sense.  If they have 
sensitive materials that need to be discussed, they can just use cell phones 
which they do even when they are using digital P25 systems.  I have no real 
basis on which to make this statement, but I really feel that the more 
complex the systems are, the more vulnerable they are to either technical 
issues in general or perhaps cyber attacks.  Just give me good old analog. 
At least you can tell if some one is trying to get through to dispatch. 
With digital, it seems to be either all or nothing at all though I have 
noticed some intermediate garbage garble stuff on P25 so maybe there is some 
in between point.  73, Jim WA6EKS


-----Original Message----- 
From: Blake Hailey
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 4:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: accessible scanners

I enjoyed scanning years ago.  But for those reasons I haven't brought a
trunk scanner.  I hope Whistler takes you seriously.  I'd like to listen to
public service again.
73 KA5POW
Blake


-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Jim Gammon
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: accessible scanners

Matthew, I could never program it manually.  Perhaps Ron or
others on the list have done so.  The only way I have done it is
to get a file of local trunked and conventional frequencies from
a ham friend then use PSR Edit to upload said file to the
scanner.  That is why I so much want Whistler to take seriously
suggestions we provide about making their new scanners
accessible.  I think anyone on this list who has one or intends
to get one of the newer scanners should give them input long as
it's constructive and not just critical and also focuses on just
making their scanners accessible.  Jim WA6EKS

> ----- Original Message -----
>From: Matthew Chao <[log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Date sent: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 20:20:11 -0400
>Subject: Re: accessible scanners

>How easy is it to program out of the box?--Matt, N1IBB.

>At 05:23 PM 8/14/2014, you wrote:
>>I highly recommend the PSR-500...on tests with very high end test
equipment
>>the GRE PSR-500 has measurably better receiver sensativity.
>>The audio is excellent as well and very easy to hear even in
noisy
>>environments.

>>73
>>Colin, V A6BKX
>>--------------------------------------------------
>>From: "Matthew Chao" <[log in to unmask]
>>Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 2:43 PM
>>To: <[log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: accessible scanners

>>> Which one would you guys recommend:  the bcd396, or this
one?--Matt,
>>> N1IBB.

>>> At 02:33 PM 8/14/2014, you wrote:
>>>>Russ, It's a handheld scanner.  Jim WA6EKS

>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From: Russ Kiehne <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>Date sent: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:37:24 -0700
>>>>>Subject: Re: accessible scanners

>>>>>       Is the psr500 a base or handheld scanner?

>>>>>On 8/14/2014 8:27 AM, Ron Miller wrote:
>>>>>> Hi  ,
>>>>>> Yes it does decode P25.

>>>>>> Also, Jim, I am most definitely not saying that we should
>>>>discourage Whistle=
>>>>>> r from designing accessibility features into their scanner
>>>>receivers.  Quite t=
>>>>>> he contrary, I am all for it.  In fact, I had begun a dialog
>>>>with the folks a=
>>>>>> t GRE America on this very subject.

>>>>>> The intent of my post was simply to respond to a previous
>>>>message about Whis=
>>>>>> tler's current scanner line and to say that I'm successfully
>>>>using the PSR-5=
>>>>>> 00 along with PSREdit and the Whistler version of this scanner
>>>>should be equ=
>>>>>> ally usable.

>>>>>> BTW, Russ, if we can work out a time, I would be glad to chat
>>>>with you about=
>>>>>>   how I use PSREdit.

>>>>>> 73,

>>>>>> Ron Miller
>>>>>> N6MSA

>>>>>> Ron Miller

>>>>>>> On Aug 14, 2014, at 10:11 AM, Russ Kiehne <[log in to unmask]
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> =20
>>>>>>> Does the psr500 do p25?