• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Assigning QKs (436)

Status
Not open for further replies.

rwier

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
1,904
Location
Phoenix, AZ
#1
In Sentinel (436 flavor), I created multiple FLs. I assigned QKs to the FLs sequentially starting with QK1. After reaching 16, I decided to assign 0 (zero) to the next FL. No problem, as I was able to turn these 17 FLs off/on with the QK system.

Now, my next FL (18th) was assigned the QK of 17. Every thing in Sentinel appeared the same as the previous 17 FLs. However, I am not able to get QK 17 to function as an on/off procedure.

As a test, I have re-assigned the QK numbers 18, 19 and 20 (three separate tests) to said 18th FL. Each time, the FL appears to have acquired the QK number, but they are non functional from the scanner controls in a normal manner (turning FLs on/off).

As a test, I then went back and changed the zero QK to 17. Now all FLs have QKs that are numbered in sequential order as created. Now, all QKs are fully functional from the keyboard. Zero is not being used to number a QK.

This would make it appear that QKs must be assigned in sequential order as the FLs were created? Probably something I'm missing, or maybe a quirk in Sentinel?
 
Last edited:

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
5,648
Location
NW Tenn
#2
Rob for what ever reason my 436 I have 0-23 and do not see the problem you are having as I started with 0 and added.
 

rwier

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
1,904
Location
Phoenix, AZ
#3
Rob for what ever reason my 436 I have 0-23 and do not see the problem you are having as I started with 0 and added.
A way to check if there is a flaw, simply assign QK1 to your NOW QK Zero, and assign QK Zero to your NOW QK1. I'm guessing that after such re-assigning, only QK Zero and QK1 will function properly, and the other 22 QKs will become inoperative.
 

rwier

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
1,904
Location
Phoenix, AZ
#6
A way to check if there is a flaw, simply assign QK1 to your NOW QK Zero, and assign QK Zero to your NOW QK1. I'm guessing that after such re-assigning, only QK Zero and QK1 will function properly, and the other 22 QKs will become inoperative.
I made the same test as above and could NOT duplicate the problem.
 

ofd8001

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
6,102
Location
Louisville, KY
#8
Noting this may be academic, I've got numerous Favorites Lists. I do not use sequential numbers. Some are in the single digits, some in the teens, thirties, seventies and eighties. No issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top