Does the psr500 do p25?
On 8/13/2014 8:42 PM, Jim Gammon wrote:
> Ron, how do you deal with the scanner when the display says
> nothing enabled? I really think they could do a better job, even
> with the beeps. I have owned a PSR500 scanner since 2010, and,
> while I can work it, I have never figured out how to use PSR Edit
> to program it, even when a friend sends me files of frequencies I
> want. I can upload that file which works great, and can set the
> scanner on a given talk group, but there is much that I wish I
> could do. Given that Whistler is developing new scanners, why
> should we discourage them from making them more accessible then
> they are which is not much at all in my opinion. Jim WA6EKS
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Ron Miller <[log in to unmask]
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Date sent: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 22:34:26 -0400
>> Subject: Re: accessible scanners
>
>> Hello,
>> Check out the Whistler models available. I own and very
> successfully use the
>> GRE PSR-500, the original version of the current Whistler
> handheld. I use
>> the PSR500 Edit software and the scanner's included USB cable. I
> can program
>> the scanner and configure it exactly the way I want it to be. I
> can then use
>> it very well in the field. I find it very accessible, even
> though it does
>> not have speech output. Speech is not the only way to
> successfully use a
>> piece of comm. gear, so don't let the lack of speech detour you.
>
>> 73
>
>
>> Ron Miller
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: For blind ham radio operators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> On Behalf Of Matthew Chao
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 10:29 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: accessible scanners
>
>> Hi, Martin. I'm looking for an accessible scanner; any current
> ideas? And
>> what about using USB interfaces instead of serial ones, as many
> systems no
>> longer come with serial ports, and the USB-TO-serial adapters can
> be a
>> little sketcy.--Matt, N1IBB.
>
>> At 10:14 AM 8/13/2014, you wrote:
>>> Another useful feature is when one can communicate with
> a
>>> scanner or transceiver via serial interface. I have two Uniden
>>> scanners. One is now eleven years old and has a rather turse
> command
>>> set that one can access via a terminal program much the way you
> can
>>> access one of the old telephone dial-up modems. All the
> characters must
>>> be upper case and all the replies are also in upper case but you
> can
>>> read the display, setup trunking systems, etc. The only problem
> is that
>>> the Motorola SmartZone trunking is now unusable since the new
> rebanded
>>> frequency plans can not be fed in to the scanner as a flash
> upgrade
>>> since the
>>> bc780 does not have that capability.
>>> It is, however, accessible since the command set and
> responses
>>> are all plain ASCII text.
>>> That sort of access is much appreciated. I also have
> another
>>> Uniden which was made around 2008. It does P25 and the new
> rebanded
>>> Motorola trunking just fine.
>>> It also has an ASCII command set and is potentially
> totally
>>> accessible but one needs to either be running one of the Windows
>>> programs that talk to your scanner or you must be willing to
> write your
>>> own communications program in C or perl. I am a Linux user so
> that is
>>> kind of par for the course.
>>> For the BCD996 and the BCD396, the commands and
> responses are
>>> still ASCII but they use CSV or Comma-Separated Variable strings.
> These
>>> are sometimes hugely long lines of text in which each field is
>>> separated from it's neighbors by a , so a string for input or
> output
>>> might look like 1,01453500,1,,,3,2,7,K5SRC Stillwater
> Repeater,14,0,9
>>> That is not a valid entry anywhere, but it is an example
> of
>>> what a CSV string looks like. You see them all the time in
> business
>>> applications that may be used with spread sheets and tables.
>>> One of my next home projects is to take the C program I
> wrote
>>> for the BCD996 and try to re-do it in perl as I may get it to do
> more
>>> than it presently does.
>>> I would sure like to see more radios that have some sort
> of
>>> electronic input and output like the Kenwoods and several others.
> To
>>> me, that is almost as good as having speech boards in the radio
> which,
>>> of course, is the holy grail but may not have as much mass appeal
> as
>>> being able to interface with a serial port on a computer or maybe
> a web
>>> interface.
>>> Let's hope that this period of totally inaccessible
> technology
>>> is ending and we just might be able to really use some of this
> stuff
>>> again.
>>> I remember the first truly inaccessible piece of amateur
> radio
>>> gear I encountered. It was in the mid seventies and was a
> two-meter
>>> transceiver that had an Up and Down button pair for frequency, no
>>> direct entry and no way to get to a known state except for that
> stupid
>>> little LED display. If you could even get it to start at 144.000
> MHZ,
>>> do you really want to count in 5 KHZ steps up to say, 147.925 and
> hope
>>> there were no key bounces or missed presses?
>>> The guy in the store said, I don't think there is any
> way you
>>> can use that and he was absolutely right. Don't you just hate
> that?
>
>>> 73 Martin McCormick WB5AGZ
>
>>> Jim Gammon writes:
>>>> John, I have been corresponding with the Whistler group
>>>> regarding there trunked scanners. Thought you would like to
> read
>>>> the latest. Jim
> .
>
|