RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Scanners, Receivers and Related Equipment Forums > Uniden Forums > Uniden Tech Support


Uniden Tech Support - For discussion of all technical aspects of current or future Uniden scanners.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 06-12-2018, 10:33 AM
petrol88's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kikito View Post
(Trying to stay neutral here without taking sides)...

You could also take what UPMan said as neither is necessary because they know about it and they’re working on it?

Either way maybe you could submit a ticket to Uniden Support or something I’m guessing...

Agreed. It is quite clear that he has read this thread and is aware of the report. I don't believe he is under any obligation to make any comment at all...
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 06-13-2018, 10:55 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,565
Default

Questions for the OP from engineering:

1. Confirm that BCD436HP is not doing the same thing (I think that is correct, but please confirm). If possible, a side-by-side video of both scanning from the same simple FL with only that system would help.

2. What is the RSSI when this is happening (detail mode RSSI is a default field).

3. What is the NOISE value when this is happening (modify detail mode to show NOISE in a field).

4. Is it happening only on analog, only on digital (provoice), or both?
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 06-13-2018, 1:14 PM
Bolt21's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Point of Pines
Posts: 1,319
Default

Disclaimer: I loaded the beta firmware you posted yesterday to see if it helped with EDACS (didn't think it would - it didn't, figured I didn't have anything to lose), and this data reflects that version.

1. I monitor the Hillsborough EDACS system as I travel for work, didn't have both models with me, and I do not get decent reception at home to provide video, but can assure you that the BCD436HP is NOT doing the same thing. Fyi, this also happens with the EDACS systems in Pasco, Brevard and Indian River counties.

2. RSSI is -50/-45dBm (observed within Hillsborough County)

3. NOISE fluctuates between 150-200 (during transmissions, observed within Hillsborough County)

4. Not 100% sure, but I *believe* it happens on both analog and PV. Most definitely with analog.
__________________
Lowly Technician-Class Operator
"If they pull guns at us, make no mistake about it, we will shoot them. A lot." - Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd

Last edited by Bolt21; 06-13-2018 at 2:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 06-13-2018, 2:57 PM
wise871's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,673
Default SDS100: Is anyone else....

No problem here in the Florida Panhandle. Picking up SLERS in the next County over. Haven’t missed any transmissions and my RSSI is around -90 to -100. From work I get -30 to -40.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Dan
Uniden:SDS100,BCD536HP,BCD996p2,HP-1/2e,BCD396XT,BCD996T(XT),BCT15X, BC898T
Radio Shack:PRO-197,PRO-106
Vintage:PRO-25,Sony Air-8
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 06-14-2018, 12:19 PM
Bolt21's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Point of Pines
Posts: 1,319
Default

After today, I'm seriously thinking that my unit might be defective. Today I traveled through Hernando County, which has a Motorola analog system. The SDS100 was exhibiting the same difficulty it had with the EDACS systems - clipping and missing transmissions. At this point, all this thing is good for is systems that suffer from LSM. My 436HP outperforms it in every other category, including decades old trunking technology. I should however, add that it does seem to perform as well as the 436HP on DMR systems.

I would expect performance like this if I was the next county over and trying to listen with a stock rubber duck. A brand new scanner like this shouldn't be having problems within the county with an 800mhz antenna and good signal.
__________________
Lowly Technician-Class Operator
"If they pull guns at us, make no mistake about it, we will shoot them. A lot." - Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd

Last edited by Bolt21; 06-14-2018 at 12:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 06-14-2018, 1:20 PM
jonwienke's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PA
Posts: 8,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolt21 View Post
I should however, add that it does seem to perform as well as the 436HP on DMR systems.
That's a pretty good indicator that raw RF performance is similar, and the firmware is in need of optimizing.
__________________
Gone camping.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 06-14-2018, 5:30 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Central Connecticut
Posts: 54
Default

Monitoring the City of Hartford CT EDACS system.
1. using a 396XT, no 436
2. RSSI: -83 to -100 (high 80's to 90's)
3. Noise: 197-403 but fluctuates even during transmissions up to 5 digits.
4. Analog
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 06-16-2018, 11:27 AM
wise871's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,673
Default

I stand corrected on my original post. Decided to put my 536 up against the SDS100 using my Multicopler which is connected to a DJ130. While monitoring SLERS (Provoice) my 536 (2 bars) is blowing away my SDS100 (3 bars) which has the beta firmware. When I'm in town close the tower in the --40-50 range it was working fine from what I could tell. Currently my battery is down to 3.75. Seems like Provoice/EDACS are degraded on the SDS100.
__________________
Dan
Uniden:SDS100,BCD536HP,BCD996p2,HP-1/2e,BCD396XT,BCD996T(XT),BCT15X, BC898T
Radio Shack:PRO-197,PRO-106
Vintage:PRO-25,Sony Air-8
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 06-16-2018, 11:48 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: North Pole, Alaska
Posts: 2,536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolt21
I should however, add that it does seem to perform as well as the 436HP on DMR systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonwienke View Post
That's a pretty good indicator that raw RF performance is similar, and the firmware is in need of optimizing.
Yeah, the 400/800MHz DMR/NXDN performance in my area so far is solid and many times is BETTER than my 436. As I type this, the SDS has already picked up 3 transmissions the 436 missed. We’ll see as time goes by...
__________________
JustMeAndMyRadios
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 06-24-2018, 4:36 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: HI
Posts: 7
Default

Checking from Oahu, HI. EDACS Provoice system here...


my 436 is picking up many transmissions while my SDS100 is missing them. RSSI on the SDS100 is showing -97 up to -110. however the 436 with the stock antenna next to it picks up transmissions just fine.

hoping we see a firmware fix soon. Bought the SDS100 cause of the advertising that it has better reception and does better with Simulcast.
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 12:03 AM
WoodburyMan's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Woodbury, CT
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfr454 View Post
Yes,
while scanning the City of Hartford, CT system which is an 800mhz analog EDACS system the SDS100 is deaf to several transmissions while my 396XT is picking them up. Running both radios side by side same antenna, RS800 with Uniden BNC adapters.
I was beginning to wonder the same thing...
Confirmed. Stuck in I-84/I-91 traffic (Dead stop) for an hour 100 yards from a van on fire. Had HP II and SDS with me. I had State Troop H sites and Hartford selected. HP II got a lot of transmissions SDS100 did not, or clipped them.

Not up in Hartford often so can't verify, but can test with some local 800mhz State L / A repeaters between HP II and SDS100.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 5:25 AM
jonwienke's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PA
Posts: 8,884
Default

There is a beta firmware out specifically to address EDACS reception issues:
https://forums.radioreference.com/un...open-beta.html
__________________
Gone camping.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 10:32 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Cerritos, CA (LA County)
Posts: 1,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kikito View Post
Yeah, the 400/800MHz DMR/NXDN performance in my area so far is solid and many times is BETTER than my 436. As I type this, the SDS has already picked up 3 transmissions the 436 missed. We’ll see as time goes by...
I am getting the exact opposite here with NXDN. DMR is closer in performance, but 436HP seems bit better. My SDS misses all kinds of LA Metro NXDN that my 436 picks up. I don't understand the reason for different results between kikito and myself. Only time will tell. Awaiting FW updates.
__________________
Steve AA6IO - ARRL and W5YI VE
GMRS WQWE213
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 10:39 AM
jonwienke's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PA
Posts: 8,884
Default

If you're not doing the comparison with both scanners connected to the same antenna, then the results are going to be inconsistent.
__________________
Gone camping.
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 10:59 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,839
Default

Are you talking about LA MTA?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sshermanmd View Post
I am getting the exact opposite here with NXDN. DMR is closer in performance, but 436HP seems bit better. My SDS misses all kinds of LA Metro NXDN that my 436 picks up. .
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 2:55 PM
Badboy536's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karldotcom View Post
Are you talking about LA MTA?
After i put the Beta firmware on it fuxed MTA Metro
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 2:58 PM
Hit_Factor's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Saint Joseph, MI
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Badboy536 View Post
it fuxed MTA Metro
Is that good or bad?
__________________
73, K8HIT
Icom: IC-7300, ID-5100A, ID-51A Plus 2, IC-R30 Yaesu: FT2DR & FT70, Hytera PD782G, Uniden SDS100
DVMega running Pi-Star: D-Star, DMR, System Fusion, P25, NXDN, SDRplay RSPduo
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 3:09 PM
mciupa's Avatar
Forums Moderator
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hit_Factor View Post
Is that good or bad?
He used a poorly disguised euphemism for a vulgar word, so I would say, bad.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 3:12 PM
Badboy536's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 83
Default

SORRY it "fixed the problem with Metro MTA" so much better with the beta firmware.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 06-25-2018, 3:15 PM
Badboy536's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 83
Default

I was having a lot of problems with the first firmware from Sentinel. Missed a lot of com's. But after the latest beta firmware it fixed the Metro MTA and even improved analog receive.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions