scannerman200
Member
there is a frequency that is used in a county next to mine (155.9025). The pro 97 will let you enter the frequency 155.9025. On my other scanners, the frequency rounds to 155.900. Should I enter 155.9025 in my pro 97 or 155.900?
8 digit frequency question
- Thread starter scannerman200
- Start date
- Status
Pro97 might have auto channel steps setup. I noticed on my 92 I put freq in and changes it I couldn't change the last 4. Try 155.9025 in your pro97.
scannerman200
Member
155.9025 goes into my scanner without rounding. Would I pick the freq up better like this or should I round it to 155.900?
try to put both in and scan too see what comes in clear.
n4voxgill
Silent Key
If your other scanners are older models, they may not take the new narrowband frequeancies.
Continue to put the correct frequency in your Pro97. It will give the clearest signal.
For your other scanner check the manual and see if it will take 12.5 khz frequencies. I had an old regency handheld that had a switch on the top you had to throw to work 12.5 kHz. You may have to change the step in the scanner, or it may only work by rounding.
Continue to put the correct frequency in your Pro97. It will give the clearest signal.
For your other scanner check the manual and see if it will take 12.5 khz frequencies. I had an old regency handheld that had a switch on the top you had to throw to work 12.5 kHz. You may have to change the step in the scanner, or it may only work by rounding.
Hi all,
If you cannot change the frequency step to accomodate NBFM "splinter" frequencies and it rounds down you may or may not get clear sounding audio or you may get bleed over from the adjacent frequency. If either happens manually round up, that should clear things up considerably. BTW, that age old trick also works to eliminate bleed on standard frequencies and kills birdies and intermod. You might compare it to receive incremental tuning (RIT) on ham rigs we use to reduce or eliminate splatter from closely spaced transmissions.
If you cannot change the frequency step to accomodate NBFM "splinter" frequencies and it rounds down you may or may not get clear sounding audio or you may get bleed over from the adjacent frequency. If either happens manually round up, that should clear things up considerably. BTW, that age old trick also works to eliminate bleed on standard frequencies and kills birdies and intermod. You might compare it to receive incremental tuning (RIT) on ham rigs we use to reduce or eliminate splatter from closely spaced transmissions.
DaveH
Member
n4voxgill said:
That is not 12.5kHz. It is 7.5kHz (155.9100 - 0.0075 or 155.8800 + 0.0075 ).
Dave
Thorny41587
Member
What's the newst spacing nowadays?
DonS
Member
The spacing in the range [154.650000 .. 156.247500] MHz is 7.5 kHz. (47CFR90.20(c)).X1536 said:
nexus
Member
I believe the newest spacing these days is 2.5 kHz
A lot of older scanners only offered two types. 5 kHz, and 12.5 kHz. You should use what best comes in. But keep in mind a lot of public safety departments are being told to leave the 5 kHz frequencies for the smaller ones to make more use of the bandwidth. Of course this all requires newer radios with better filtering and only on NFM (Narrowband FM).
A lot of older scanners only offered two types. 5 kHz, and 12.5 kHz. You should use what best comes in. But keep in mind a lot of public safety departments are being told to leave the 5 kHz frequencies for the smaller ones to make more use of the bandwidth. Of course this all requires newer radios with better filtering and only on NFM (Narrowband FM).
Somewhat related.........My local PD is on 460.450, and on my older scanner (pro-2046), I get a PD thats 27 miles away on their 460.4625.
Hi again,
It looks like many of you have frequency steps mixed up with channel spacing, do the math. The steps are the master oscillator PLL division increments that are related to but not always EQUAL to channel spacing. What confuses you is the mix of the old standard channel spacing with splinter frequencies mixed in between them. The older FM licenses were grandfathered while all new ones conform to the new NBFM standard and are on the splinters. I'm not entirely sure but I believe the older transmitters were reduced from +/- 5KHz deviation to +/- 2.5 KHz so some scanners will have to be reset to NFM especially if you get bleed from an adjacent channel. Automatic programming according to bandplan doesn't always take this into account.
"I believe the newest spacing these days is 2.5 kHz."
No, it's 5KHz center carrier to center carrier with +/- 2.5KHz maximum deviation. In this case spacing equals channel separation (NBFM spacing).
It looks like many of you have frequency steps mixed up with channel spacing, do the math. The steps are the master oscillator PLL division increments that are related to but not always EQUAL to channel spacing. What confuses you is the mix of the old standard channel spacing with splinter frequencies mixed in between them. The older FM licenses were grandfathered while all new ones conform to the new NBFM standard and are on the splinters. I'm not entirely sure but I believe the older transmitters were reduced from +/- 5KHz deviation to +/- 2.5 KHz so some scanners will have to be reset to NFM especially if you get bleed from an adjacent channel. Automatic programming according to bandplan doesn't always take this into account.
"I believe the newest spacing these days is 2.5 kHz."
No, it's 5KHz center carrier to center carrier with +/- 2.5KHz maximum deviation. In this case spacing equals channel separation (NBFM spacing).
- Status
