Great points, Colin. I suspect that what happened here is the trunking
system they bought just didn't have the capacity they needed. The
bureaucrats tried to cheap it out and, of course in the long run, payed a
much higher price. What else is new?
And I do have and use a Baofeng both for ham work and listening to police
and fire frequencies. It gets the job done but, as we're right in town,
there is a lot of mixing and intermod going on and I know there must be
something out there with a more bullet-proof front end. 73. Lou WA3MIX
Lou Kolb
Voice-over Artist:
Radio/TV Ads, Video narrations
Messages On-hold:
www.loukolb.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: Comments on trunked systems
> depending on how many channels you need to scan, you might be just as good
> with something like a baofeng UV5R or gt3.
> If you have say, 10 frequencies total, the baofeng scan rate will deal
> with
> that very well and you won't miss much...if you want to program say 50
> frequencies though, the scan rate is too slow to make it a very good
> scanner...you'll miss the first few seconds of a transmission with a radio
> like that.
> But, for just VHF and UHF analogue frequencies, it's pretty good.
> Or, any of the scanners that are sold as nas car, or airband scanners,
> will
> work as well since they are typically best at vhf and UHF receiving.
> Our local EDACS trunking system works very well indeed. The local
> constabulary switched over in the late 90's or early 2000's from a 460MHZ
> analogue repeater system. The system was done properly to begin with
> because they weren't trying to upgrade, but build an entirely new system
> with more repeater sites and full wide area access with handheld coverage
> across the entire city with zero dark areas.
> The analogue trunk system has absolutely fantastic audio, is fast and
> trouble free.
> As i said, all police radios have the ability to use provoice digital
> here,
> with a simple channel switch, which can actually be done by the dispatcher
> remotely if necesary.
> However, for officer safety, and for quality and high communications
> integrity, they stick to the analogue part of the system for all dispatch
> calls and general traffic...the handheld coverage is absolutely amazing on
> this system and they've never needed to update or upgrade the system to
> anything different...why fix it if it ain't broke right? adding on the
> provoice digital simply allows them to have a massive amount of extra talk
> groups if needed...and occasionally when things get super busy, they do
> use
> a provoice talk group for dispatch purposes.
> Anyway, I have heard so many horror stories from the US about digital
> radio
> systems that were shuvved down the civic throat by big communications
> companies going after the 20 or 30 million dollar contract...when in
> reality, the system makes actual communication much less reliable and
> difficult for the officers and people in the field.
> And, when VHF and UHF analogue repeaters are so much easier to maintain,
> the
> equipment is cheaper and more reliable and when the police, fire and ems
> resources are relatively small, like for a county or smaller city, it just
> makes better sence.
> The trunk systems really shine when you have a very large city with
> thousands and thousands of users who can be put onto a system that only
> takes up 24 or so frequencies of band width and where the system helps to
> determine frequency use.
> You can pile 10 different city or state or county agencies on to one trunk
> system and everyone has full instant use...instead of having a whole bunch
> of separate VHF or UHF repeaters set up...also, each member of the system,
> IE police, fire and EMS can easily talk to one another by pulling up the
> appropriate talk group on their radios.
> So, the concept makes allot of sence for a large urban area with many
> agencies that interact.
> But hey, some cities, still use a 16 repeater UHF system with repeater
> sites
> located in the region of the city where they are needed...unfortunately,
> on
> these systems you hear allot of doubling, and miscommunication because of
> too many users on the same frequency pair. It gets muddled and dangerous.
> On a trunk system, you key your radio, and when you hear the beep, you can
> start talking, so doubling doesn't exist on these systems and therefore,
> no
> transmission is ever lost.
>
>
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Lou Kolb" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 3:10 PM
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Comments on trunked systems
>
>> Here in Williamsport Pa, a fairly small city in a largely rural area,
>> they
>> had an analog trunking system back in the 90s. They were so disapointed
>> with
>> it that, ten years later, they went back to open analog repeater systems
>> in
>> the 150 megahertz range. Plus, we have a couple uHF systems as well. My
>> question is what is a good analog scanner for those frequencies that has
>> a
>> decent front end. We have a couple cheap ones that are sensitive enough
>> but
>> the intermod and mixing is just aweful. Suggestions apreciated. Thanks
>> and
>> 73. Lou WA3MIX
>> Lou Kolb
>> Voice-over Artist:
>> Radio/TV Ads, Video narrations
>> Messages On-hold:
>> www.loukolb.com
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 2:43 PM
>> Subject: Re: Comments on trunked systems
>>
>>
>>>A few communities near me and on cape cod actually went back to
>>>conventional
>>> because of all the problems with the trunking systems.
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Jim Gammon" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 1:37 PM
>>> Subject: Comments on trunked systems
>>>
>>>
>>>>I think that in general, counties and states have been sold a
>>>> pipe dream when it comes to the new digital trunked systems.
>>>> They are very complex. A few years ago, I heard Richmond CA's
>>>> trunked system go down and in a few hours when it became evident
>>>> that there were some serious issues, the county sheriff folks
>>>> came out with a truck load of handheld radios for the local cops
>>>> to use while they were fixing the Edacs trunked system. More
>>>> recently, Oakland's problem-ridden trunked system went down when
>>>> the POTUS was in town and I think Oakland has recently decided to
>>>> scrap their hugely expensive system and join the EBRCS system
>>>> used by Alameda and Contra Costa County that has come online over
>>>> the past couple years. In all fairness, that EBRCS p25
>>>> system seems to work alright but for the kind of garbled sound
>>>> you sometimes hear but maybe that's just on kind of cheap
>>>> scanners. Actually one of the reasons for trunking namely
>>>> sharing frequencies, is a very sound one when you think of say a
>>>> conventional frequency used by a fire department that may only be
>>>> used a few times each hour, but my opinion still hasn't changed
>>>> about the hype and complexity that has gone into the new systems.
>>>> I really do hope that many agencies hold on to their old
>>>> conventional frequencies for a long time. I could go on about
>>>> this but will not. Jim WA6EKS
>>>>
>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From: Butch Bussen <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>Date sent: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 07:38:05 -0700
>>>>>Subject: Re: Programming a PSR500?
>>>>
>>>>>THis is I think their third attempt. When I first moved there,
>>>> the
>>>>>state blew 20 million or so on a vhf system fro motorola and had
>>>> to
>>>>>scrap that one as they weren't licensed. Of course, the guy who
>>>> was in
>>>>>charge of that had just retired. hmmmmm. They then spent
>>>> another twenty
>>>>>mil on something else which didn't work, and now they're messing
>>>> with
>>>>>this desert sky system. When I left in 2010, one of the main
>>>> techs was
>>>>>in our ham club and he said it wasn't any good. Audio sounded
>>>> like you
>>>>>were blowing bubbles througha straw.
>>>>>73
>>>>>Butch
>>>>>WA0VJR
>>>>>Node 3148
>>>>>Wallace, ks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Ron Miller
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Butch,
>>>>>> Yes, LV has gone to Open Sky (called desert sky for their
>>>> system) but are
>>>>>> extremely dissatisfied with it. They proposed switching to a
>>>> P25 system but
>>>>>> have not yet done so. I suspect budget constraints are holding
>>>> them back.
>>>>>> The article I read indicated they invested a lot in the desert
>>>> sky system.
>>>>
>>>>>> Ron Miller
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: For blind ham radio operators
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>>>> On Behalf Of Butch Bussen
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 11:00 PM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Programming a PSR500?
>>>>
>>>>>> I have a rat shack pro 433 and a hand held 528, take the same
>>>> programming
>>>>>> software. This software doesn't talk at all. I did get it
>>>> programmed when
>>>>>> I lived in Vegas, I subscribed to some data base and finally
>>>> figured how to
>>>>>> have it download the file to the scanner, but it wasn't very
>>>> speech friendly
>>>>>> either, and I haven't even unpacked the thing since I moved back
>>>> to Kansas.
>>>>>> I think h p has gone trunking and some cities have gone to some
>>>> sort of
>>>>>> digital that can't be received by any scanner. I'm told Vegas
>>>> has since
>>>>>> gone to blue sky or something like that which can't be monitored
>>>> either.
>>>>>> 73
>>>>>> Butch
>>>>>> WA0VJR
>>>>>> Node 3148
>>>>>> Wallace, ks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Aug 2014, Jim
>>>>>> Gammon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Colin, have you been able to manually program a PSR500? You have
>>>> much
>>>>>>> more knowledge or patience than I do. Jim WA6EKS
>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>> From: Colin McDonald <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>> Date sent: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 19:13:10 -0600
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: accessible scanners
>>>>
>>>>>>>> that is a pretty subjective question...
>>>>>>>> It really depends on how familiar you are with programming
>>>> logic,
>>>>>>> and how
>>>>>>>> trunked systems are programmed, or if you use radio reference
>>>> and
>>>>>>> that sort
>>>>>>>> of thing.
>>>>>>>> These days, using radio reference to program your scanner makes
>>>>>>> them nearly
>>>>>>>> plug and play devices...but for those of us who have used
>>>>>>> scanners for many
>>>>>>>> years had to deal with manual programming on radios that didn't
>>>>>>> offer any
>>>>>>>> sort of real accessible feedback...but were also all
>>>> programmable
>>>>>>> via the
>>>>>>>> keypad...so as long as you can work out a key chart for a
>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>> scanner, most of them are usable, though not to the point where
>>>>>>> you can
>>>>>>>> always be sure of a particular state, IE, which banks or groups
>>>>>>> are turned
>>>>>>>> on or off at any given point etc, or what the display shows and
>>>>>>> so on.
>>>>>>>> Anyway, out of the box, with a little learning, you should be
>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>>> The manuals are online and the best way to learn any new piece
>>>> of
>>>>>>> gear is
>>>>>>>> through trial and error...you really can't screw anything up
>>>>>>> beyond what a
>>>>>>>> reset can fix.
>>>>>>>> I usually learn the programming by entering a system in a few
>>>>>>> times and
>>>>>>>> resetting so I can get the hang of it before entering a whole
>>>>>>> bunch of
>>>>>>>> systems and frequencies in, just to find out after that I did
>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>>> Plugging into radio reference will program the scanner for you
>>>>>>> and set
>>>>>>>> everything up in a nice easy to use manner...but I believe there
>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>> fee...but it works well if you travel or go between counties or
>>>>>>> cities where
>>>>>>>> there are allot of systems.
>>>>>>>> Upgrade to the psr800 and you get an SD card that you can load
>>>>>>> all your
>>>>>>>> systems on to, and record scanner audio as well.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> 73
>>>>>>>> Colin, V A6BKX
>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> From: "Matthew Chao" <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 6:20 PM
>>>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>
|
