HP-2: Home Patrol 3 ?

Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
65
Location
Greene County Ohio
#1
Hello, the crux of my question is when does Uniden normally release new models? I understand the consumer electronics show is going on this week. I also know it’s been several years since the Home Patrol 2 came out. Just wondering if there might be a Home Patrol 3 on the near horizon?

Part two of my question would be, if you have a Home Patrol, how does it handle MARCS Montgomery county Ohio simulcast distortion?

Thanks
 

troymail

Silent Key
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,977
Location
Supply (Lockwood Inlet area), NC
#2
Hello, the crux of my question is when does Uniden normally release new models? I understand the consumer electronics show is going on this week. I also know it’s been several years since the Home Patrol 2 came out. Just wondering if there might be a Home Patrol 3 on the near horizon?
Whenever they are (almost and sort of) ready... :lol: In November 2013, they announced the 436 and 536 which went on sale about 2 months later (if I recall correctly).... but then they spent the next year (I'm certain - more than a year) delivering everything they said these radios where actually supposed to do... I stopped paying attention but I believe some folks believe they still haven't delivered everything they promised in Nov 2013.

They won't say otherwise.... but it is the same thing everyone wants to know....
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
1,913
Location
parma,ohio
#4
dbsar Buy a G4 Pager it will fix your problem i use to have the Pro-197 would NOT pick up the NEW Marcs system so i sold the 197 got the TRX-2 GREAT SCANNER but still can't pick up Marcs so i got the G5 VHF Pager no more problems it works 100% at home in Parma.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,018
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
#5
Hello, the crux of my question is when does Uniden normally release new models? I understand the consumer electronics show is going on this week. I also know it’s been several years since the Home Patrol 2 came out. Just wondering if there might be a Home Patrol 3 on the near horizon?

Part two of my question would be, if you have a Home Patrol, how does it handle MARCS Montgomery county Ohio simulcast distortion?

Thanks
Uniden very seldom announces anything until you can buy it.

If the system you want to monitor is phase 1 P25 only, and it's the only real system you monitor, a G4 is probably your best pick.

If you want to monitor any phase 2, then it's not.

Monitoring simulcast systems is tricky, but it can be done with a regular scanner. It depends on your location with regard to the locations of towers and some other issues. Also, some scanners, such as the 436/536 and to some extent the HP-2 seem to do better than dome others. The system itself can also impact ability of any scanner to monitor.

Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
 

WX4JCW

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
2,106
Location
All Over USA
#6
If you are on Marcs get a G4/G5 nothing except a system radio beats in on P25


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
65
Location
Greene County Ohio
#7
Thanks for your help. I already have bcd396xt and monitor vhf, uhf, and MARCS in Greene and Montgomery county Ohio. I really like the features of HP2 extreme upgrade primarily ease of programming and big bright display. Just not sure now is the time to upgrade. Silmulcast distortion bearable but wishing for better.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#8
Also, some scanners, such as the 436/536 and to some extent the HP-2 seem to do better than dome others.
I recently had the chance to do a head-to-head comparison between the 536, 436, and HP-2 on my local county's P25 simulcast system. Holding on the system, the 436 and 536 were clear winners; the HP-2 only received about 50-60% of the traffic, and the 436 and 536 got about 95%.

Your mileage may vary depending on the exact reception conditions in your area and unit variation.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
941
Location
NYC Metro
#9
I recently had the chance to do a head-to-head comparison between the 536, 436, and HP-2 on my local county's P25 simulcast system. Holding on the system, the 436 and 536 were clear winners; the HP-2 only received about 50-60% of the traffic, and the 436 and 536 got about 95%.

Your mileage may vary depending on the exact reception conditions in your area and unit variation.
When you say "only received" 50-60% of the traffic, are you saying it was completely missing the other 50%, or are you saying 50% of the traffic was listenable and 50% garbled? My HP-2 doesn't seem to miss many transmissions, but it has a lot of problems with garbled/inaudible transmissions.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#10
About half of the transmissions received by the 536 and 436 were completely missed by the HP-2, even though all of them were holding on the system.
 

W8RMH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
7,709
Location
Grove City, Ohio (A Bearcat not a Buckeye)
#11
I love my HP-2 and thought I was receiving all of my local Phase I Simulcast while mobile, until I got my Unication G4 and heard what I was missing. It works great at home with a yagi though, and statewide mobile, except in simulcast areas. If they released a HP-3 that decoded simulcast I would buy one, but I don't expect them to.
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
941
Location
NYC Metro
#12
I love my HP-2 and thought I was receiving all of my local Phase I Simulcast while mobile, until I got my Unication G4 and heard what I was missing. It works great at home with a yagi though, and statewide mobile, except in simulcast areas. If they released a HP-3 that decoded simulcast I would buy one, but I don't expect them to.
My assumption is that whatever hardware is needed to properly decode LSM is too cost prohibitive for a consumer grade scanner.
 

KK4JUG

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
2,140
Location
GA, AL, TX, OK, KS, AR, NC, or MI
#14
Although I like the HP-2 because of its ease of operation on the screen, color display, etc., it's really not the best scanner out there. Because of its spotty history, I doubt that they'll do much with it in the near future.
 

fxdscon

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
3,793
#15
Although I like the HP-2 because of its ease of operation on the screen, color display, etc., it's really not the best scanner out there. Because of its spotty history, I doubt that they'll do much with it in the near future.
Spotty history??

Where did you get that from??


HP-1 was the best selling digital scanner in history. It was in production for over 8 years, the longest we've ever had the same digital model in production. It was replaced by the HP-2 only because of P25 Phase 2. HP-2 is still in production.
.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2017
Messages
47
#18
I will endorse the "spotty history" as I bought the HomePatrol-2 in fall 2017 for the sole purpose of monitoring my local Harris Phase 2 simulcast system (which I believe is common these days for public safety networks....exactly the HP2's intended audience), and the HP2 worked like absolute garbage. I wasted many hours trying to cajole that thing into picking up that system without much of any luck. I tried everything including big stupid Yagi antennas, messing with settings, etc. I honestly almost gave up on the scanning hobby because of the HP2 because I thought I was doing something wrong and there was no fix.

I still am upset with Uniden for selling something that purportedly worked with "P25 Phase 2" when it only does that on paper with NON-SIMULCAST P25 networks. I bet I am not alone with my experience.

I thought it was hopeless until I followed advice on this forum. Moved to a Unication G5 late 2017 and saw how a P25 radio should really work. No messing with settings, antennas, or making excuses for it not working. G5 just works. Everywhere, with a stubby little antenna and fits in my pocket too.

Of course there is the SDS-100 now but I have little incentive to move over to it since I'm happy with my G5.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#19
Phase 2 and simulcast are 2 different things. Any digital or analog system can be simulcast. The HP2 works fine on phase 2 that isn't simulcast. And prior to the SDS100, no scanner was advertised as intended for simulcast systems.

That said, the HP2's performance on simulcast systems is pretty bad. In the informal head-to-head testing I've done, the HP2 got about half the traffic of the 436, which got about 90-95% total traffic on the same system connected to the same antenna.
 

TailGator911

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,052
Location
Fairborn, OH
#20
dbsar - I am in Greene county also, and it took several trips up to the roof to adjust my directional yagi and tweak my radios before I got it all just right. Not saying I conquered the challenge of LSM but I think I get 90-95% of it with 3 scanners focused on it (1065, 536, TRX-1) all on the yagi via a Stridsberg coupler. Had a real test the other day when the MARCS system was overloaded when the WPAFB had the active shooter scare and I heard what I needed to hear. It's tricky, like marksmith said, there are a lot of variables and you have to play with it, but it can be done. On a normal day my 536 and 1065 do just fine the way I have them set up. I expect my SDS100 to arrive today or Monday. Maybe then I'll find out just how much I have been really missing, but I don't want to hear it now lol
 
Top