RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > U.S. Regional Radio Discussion Forums > Ohio Radio Discussion Forum

Ohio Radio Discussion Forum Forum for discussing Radio Information in the State of Ohio.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 12-24-2013, 11:36 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fostoria, ohio
Posts: 120
Default MARCS-IP scanner

I was researching the Ohio forums and found that the new bearcat BCD996XT will receive the new marcs IP system? I was on the understanding that only GRE-800 would pick up the new system
__________________
Radio Shack Pro 106, Yeasu FT-60r, Kenwood Tk-8180,
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
        
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 12-24-2013, 12:07 PM
KWs's Avatar
KWs KWs is offline
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kent , Ohio
Posts: 420
Default

You should be able to monitor just fine on 996 scanners... System has capability of going Phase 2 but it is not now.
__________________
KWs
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 12-24-2013, 12:34 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,728
Default

The MARCS-IP system is capable of using TDMA modulation, however no talk groups have been confirmed to be using this type of modulation. I'm monitoring it just fine using my PSR-500. It's my understanding that as the system is right now, you can monitor with any digital scanner. I think the only exception to this is the PRO-96/2096, which is incapable of monitoring the 700 MHz frequencies for P25 trunking purposes.
__________________
Colin Taranovich

-GRE PSR-500, PRO-2055
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12-25-2013, 10:01 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fostoria, ohio
Posts: 120
Default

BCD996XT is that the portable version to the 996 mobile
__________________
Radio Shack Pro 106, Yeasu FT-60r, Kenwood Tk-8180,
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 12-25-2013, 10:29 AM
mtindor's Avatar
OH/WV DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Jefferson County, Ohio
Posts: 4,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknut937 View Post
BCD996XT is that the portable version to the 996 mobile
No. BCD996XT is an improved version of the BCD996T (both of which will monitor MARCS-IP).

BCD396T / BCD396XT are the handheld versions.

Mike
__________________
Mike / AA8IA
PSR800/PRO197/BCD436HP/BCD536HP

If I PM you about a submission, please reply promptly or your submission may be rejected.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-01-2014, 4:45 PM
sspnelson's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: South Charleston, OH
Posts: 123
Default bc996xt

when and its only a matter of when the State does go Phase II, the older models will be a good boat anchor. Save the money and get the newest model. I intend to sell of my 396 and 996 to use towards the newer scanners
__________________
stephen
BC396XT, BC996XT, BC9000XT, BC248XLT, BC60 BC200
former BC100, BC 101, BC 3, BC 12 many Regency
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-01-2014, 5:49 PM
W8RMH's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 3,166
Default

I have to agree with sspnelson. Phase II is the wave of the future. I have a BCD436HP on order and will get a BCD536HP to replace my BCD996XT sometime later this year. Might as well be ready for that day, whenever it comes.

Also in the past I heard many an agency say "We will never go to MARCS", but they eventually did.
__________________
.
BCD996XT BCD396XT BCT15X BCT15 BEARCAT IV YAESU FT60R
Columbus Police Dispatch

Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-01-2014, 9:22 PM
snjct2000's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 940
Default

But in reality it could be a full 10 years (or longer) before the Phase II switch is made.

Who knows what type of awesome scanners will be on the market then.

It's just pure speculation right now.

Why waste money on something (Phsae II) that may never come or may be very far off.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-01-2014, 11:03 PM
sspnelson's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: South Charleston, OH
Posts: 123
Default

and in that time period encryption could be rampant and not even able to listen to your local dog catcher. I and others believe the hobby is going to be extinct of listening to police and fire or technology will make it too expensive for the average joe to purchase. If Ohio has plans for Phase II, then it will more than likely happen, look what they have done so far. It wasn't that many years ago we were on Low band, it went BYE BYE completely! I can;t tell you how much money Ive thrown at scanners in a lifetime only to find that tech obsolete, lets see, tuneable, crystals, first programmable, trunking, yet technology is still outpacing the ability to monitor, IE ProVice. Only time will tell
__________________
stephen
BC396XT, BC996XT, BC9000XT, BC248XLT, BC60 BC200
former BC100, BC 101, BC 3, BC 12 many Regency
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
        
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-02-2014, 9:19 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Geauga County, Ohio
Posts: 557
Default

Some of the comments in this thread remind us old timers of the panic that was hitting the hobby when public service radio was switching to Trunked Systems and no scanner could monitor such. There were those who rung their hands and cried the death of scanners as a hobby. Well, here we are listening to Trunked Systems. Now the cry is encryption and the death of scanners once again. However, if you read posts to RadioReference made by those in the know (those who install radio systems and administer them - I am not one of them but know many of them that post), encryption is NOT a near term wave of the future. It is very, very expensive to have radios capable of encryption and very expensive to maintain encrypted radios. Also, it prevents neighboring communities public service to monitor. I subscribe to it is what it is and why worry about what can't be controlled by the hobbyist. Enjoy what we have.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2014, 9:51 AM
sspnelson's Avatar
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: South Charleston, OH
Posts: 123
Default radio comm

I fully understand the need for secure comm with police, my issue is with public safety and putting fire on encryption. My town springfield, OHIO went ProVoice back a few years ago with police and fire digital yet public works was analong. What possibly do founding fathers have for making all communication on a system that no one can hear or place encryption on all channels. I understand the cost and how can they justify they expense without getting voter approval, just because thats what they think. I mean in reality what % of crooks are really caught listeningto a scanner while burlarising, enough to block all neighborhood watch and the public from being able to monitor, watch look and listen to be able to report.
And yes Im tickled to death we can still here the Sheriff, OSO most channels and such, I know when I lived in Florida most state are ProVoice down there, unmonitorable.Yet taxpayer systems pay for it. Where is the fairness to just continue to make a system more difficult to monitor for the few in power that want it that way??
__________________
stephen
BC396XT, BC996XT, BC9000XT, BC248XLT, BC60 BC200
former BC100, BC 101, BC 3, BC 12 many Regency
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions