Dual head revelation

[scottyhetzel]

I have a 996xt and a RH remote head mounted in my truck.... I have a spare 15x. I always wanted a dedicated low band scanner for Califorinia Highway Patrol. They use 42.440 basically.

What I want to do is add both scanners to the same remote head. Have a double throw double pole toggle that shares both radios... I really don't need to see the chp radio display...but once in awhile would be nice. What do you think pro or con?

 

[Comp-100]

I have a 996xt and a RH remote head mounted in my truck.... I have a spare 15x. I always wanted a dedicated low band scanner for Califorinia Highway Patrol. They use 42.440 basically.

What I want to do is add both scanners to the same remote head. Have a double throw double pole toggle that shares both radios... I really don't need to see the chp radio display...but once in awhile would be nice. What do you think pro or con?

Sounds like a good idea in principle, I don't know what connector they are using or if throwing the switch would send some CPU into a tizzy due to spikes. I presume you've tested that operation of the one radio without a head is fine. If you connect and disconnect the head a few times while the radio is in operation does it continue to work without issue? Are you planning on switching all conductors, is the remote connection to the head only 2 wires? If the answer is yes to both questions, then I'd give it a try.

I never would have guessed anyone still using 39-42Mhz range for public-service, let alone California. Is this a side-effect of the state budget issues, or does the potentially longer range of the lower frequency in the local terrain really have benefits for them?

 

[scottyhetzel]

California has deserts, mountains and hills. Chp tested other bands and found the low band works best for them. The M.D.T. And extenders are on the 800-900 MHz band however. Plus some stations like Indio have hundreds of miles of response area. With high freq. you need lots of repeaters. Which are expensive to own and maintain.

 

[mmckenna]

I never would have guessed anyone still using 39-42Mhz range for public-service, let alone California. Is this a side-effect of the state budget issues, or does the potentially longer range of the lower frequency in the local terrain really have benefits for them?

Scotty's right on this. In some urban areas CHP has been installing 700MHz trunked systems. Most of the traffic, though, is good old VHF Low band. Work very well for what they need to do.
What many people don't realize is how large and varied the state is. A lot of mountains that would be impossible to cover, vast areas of desert. Coastal mountains with meandering roads. Hard to cover all that with anything else.

What I want to do is add both scanners to the same remote head. Have a double throw double pole toggle that shares both radios... I really don't need to see the chp radio display...but once in awhile would be nice. What do you think pro or con?

If your idea doesn't work, you could probably easily remote the power/volume control into a small box under the dash. An extension speaker somewhere out of the way, and you'd have a basic system that could cover one frequency without messing with anything else.

I agree with the above, often the CPU's don't like things getting switched around like that, but it's worth a try.

 

[N9JIG]

I have plugged RH-96's in and out of various radios over the years while they were turned on and there has never been an issue, it takes a second for them to recognize each other.

I see no reason why this wouldn't work with a DPDT switch, the ground is already common so you would only need to switch the data lines.

Remember however that the volume on the non-connected radio will revert to that of the radio's volume control, so you may have to accommodate that. If you are using a remote speaker with a volume control then leave the radio's local volume control at an appropriate level.

 

[scottyhetzel]

I have plugged RH-96's in and out of various radios over the years while they were turned on and there has never been an issue, it takes a second for them to recognize each other.

I see no reason why this wouldn't work with a DPDT switch, the ground is already common so you would only need to switch the data lines.

Remember however that the volume on the non-connected radio will revert to that of the radio's volume control, so you may have to accommodate that. If you are using a remote speaker with a volume control then leave the radio's local volume control at an appropriate level.

Thanks Rich,

 

[Project25_MASTR]

Scotty's right on this. In some urban areas CHP has been installing 700MHz trunked systems. Most of the traffic, though, is good old VHF Low band. Work very well for what they need to do.

What many people don't realize is how large and varied the state is. A lot of mountains that would be impossible to cover, vast areas of desert. Coastal mountains with meandering roads. Hard to cover all that with anything else.







If your idea doesn't work, you could probably easily remote the power/volume control into a small box under the dash. An extension speaker somewhere out of the way, and you'd have a basic system that could cover one frequency without messing with anything else.



I agree with the above, often the CPU's don't like things getting switched around like that, but it's worth a try.

TxDOT has only officially been off of low band for 3 years now. You still see it around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk