lobsterman69
Newbie
I thought that the frequency were 482.03125 for Queens FDNY?
482.03125 for Queens FDNY?
- Thread starter lobsterman69
- Start date
- Status
It is...who said that it wasn't?
lobsterman69
Newbie
So why do I hear other boroughs on this frequency? On a Baofeng radio. Thanks!It is...who said that it wasn't?
A few of the FDNY channels are spaced close together, 12.5 kHz apart. If you have Queens programmed as a wideband channels, you're going to pick up bleedover from Brooklyn on the low end and SI on the high end.
Narrowbanding was only mandatory for 150-174 MHz and 421-470 MHz. T-Band was exempt from narrowbanding, and still is (although that may change soon). NYPD's T-Band frequencies are still wide, whereas the FDNY T-Band frequencies were narrow from the start.
Because baofeng
I'm 99% sure you are wrong. Narrowbanding impacted T-Band and was a thing well before it was slated to go away with the T-Band Giveback. The deadline to convert to narrowband was after the t-band giveback passed. A number of licenses complained to the FCC about having to change and then be forced to change again so the commission suspended the requirement which is why you have a mis-mash of channels some are narrow and some are wide across T-band. Expect something coming down to clarify the FCC's stance on this - but basically with the giveback off the books I wouldn't be suprised if they give everyone 180 days to finish what they were supposed to do 10 years ago.
I'm 99% sure that you misinterpreted what I was trying to get across. Yes, T-Band was originally included in the narrowbanding mandate, however shortly after the giveback legislation was passed, the FCC issued a blanket waiver exempting T-Band from the narrowband mandate, and that waiver remains in effect to this day. Believe me, I know the history of this whole saga all too well.
I also believe that selecting narrow band in a Baofeng only reduces the TX deviation and does nothing for receive selectivity which is crap anyway.
The same is true of many scanners where selecting narrow band boosts the audio to compensate for the reduced deviation but does nothing for the IF selectivity. Professional radios and better scanners do switch the IF filters.
I have tried all of the various filter settings on the SDS200 but unfortunately it did not result in any improvement in reception of FDNY.
The "filters" in the SDS100/200 are all just software settings, not actual filters. The many issues with the SDS100/200 are well known. That is why I found it necessary to use BCD436/536HP for everything except P25 Phase II simulcast.
A little off-topic, but oh well...Others will disagree, but my SDS-series scanners are about useless on UHF. Filters, IF exchange, attenuator have no affect. I'm in a semi RF rich environment and it just wreaks havoc on these radios. 7/800 simulcast on the other hand is pretty darn good,
That matches my experience exactly. My SDS100 does a great job on the local P25 700/800 simulcast system but, in a high RF environment, the desense issues from strong in-band VHF and UHF signals make it useless at times. Tweaking the "filter" settings will mitigate some issues for particular frequencies but overall it is useless with many signals that are fine on a 436 sitting right next to it. There are even issues on 800 simulcast attempting to receive an adjacent county when the local 800 system is busy.
I agree. Although even with other scanners such as the HP-2 and BCT-8, FDNY UHF still sounds horrible.
- Status
Similar threads
