SDS100 vs 436

[mule1075]

Yes, I could sell it in the forums, but at a significant loss for a radio that's one year old.

The only way it will sell at a significant loss is if you let it. The 436 is still getting great and sometimes ridiculous prices on the used market.

 

[ansky]

No, because Uniden did not specify that the x36 scanner line (or any of their other products) were designed to receive simulcast signals. g.

Well, if you happen to look up the HP-2 on the Uniden website this is what is says:

"Receives all unencrypted, non- proprietary radio systems including APCO-25 Phase I and Phase II digital, Motorola, EDACS, LTR, conventional analog and P25 digital channels."

So if you're going to make a claim that the radio receives ALL of these systems, then it is reasonable to believe that the scanner should receive simulcast systems.

 

[buddrousa]

And simulcast systems was not mentioned so you ASSUME and that is not Unidens fault I do not see you posting in Whistlers Threads about them giving you money back and the TRX works worse than the x36's

 

[jasonhouk]

Wouldn't simulcast be a proprietary system weather analog or digital as no two systems are alike?

Houk

Well, if you happen to look up the HP-2 on the Uniden website this is what is says:

"Receives all unencrypted, non- proprietary radio systems including APCO-25 Phase I and Phase II digital, Motorola, EDACS, LTR, conventional analog and P25 digital channels."

So if you're going to make a claim that the radio receives ALL of these systems, then it is reasonable to believe that the scanner should receive simulcast systems.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[AvidHiker]

...Yes, I could sell it in the forums, but at a significant loss for a radio that's one year old.

You appear to have been a member here quite a bit longer than 1 year, so how can you claim ignorance of this widely discussed fact? I bought my 436 nearly a year ago, and a 5 minute google search turned up all I needed to know about how it handles simulcast (which it can actually manage when properly set up, despite having never been specifically claimed by Uniden).

 

[jonwienke]

Well, if you happen to look up the HP-2 on the Uniden website this is what is says:

"Receives all unencrypted, non- proprietary radio systems including APCO-25 Phase I and Phase II digital, Motorola, EDACS, LTR, conventional analog and P25 digital channels."

So if you're going to make a claim that the radio receives ALL of these systems, then it is reasonable to believe that the scanner should receive simulcast systems.

The HP2 doesn't receive DMR or NXDN, either.

 

[Jimco]

No, because Uniden did not specify that the x36 scanner line (or any of their other products) were designed to receive simulcast signals. The units do what Uniden say they would. Uniden has never said any of their scanners were designed for simulcast reception, until the SDS100, and even then they are a little coy about it. It's not a defect if you're using a product beyond it's designed capabilities. Your complaint is analogous to saying an analog scanner is defective because it doesn't receive DMR, even though it was not designed to receive DMR, and the manufacturer never claimed it would receive DMR.

It's worth noting that simulcast is not exclusive to P25 digital networks, and x36 reception is affected on all simulcast systems, both digital and analog.

Okay. Then Uniden should clearly say that it’s not suitable for simulcast systems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jonwienke]

What scanner manual lists everything the scanner doesn't receive???

 

[Voyager]

Well, if you happen to look up the HP-2 on the Uniden website this is what is says:

"Receives all unencrypted, non- proprietary radio systems including APCO-25 Phase I and Phase II digital, Motorola, EDACS, LTR, conventional analog and P25 digital channels."

So if you're going to make a claim that the radio receives ALL of these systems, then it is reasonable to believe that the scanner should receive simulcast systems.

Exactly right - no mention of LSM (simulcast) systems. Actually it will work fine on them as long as you take action to ensure only one site is received.

 

[Jimco]

Exactly right - no mention of LSM (simulcast) systems. Actually it will work fine on them as long as you take action to ensure only one site is received.

I would love to see someone describe how to do this. In the year that I've owned my 436, I have tried everything except a yagi antenna. Nothing works. I'm not alone in this either. Just head over to the Unication forums and read all of the posts from people who bought a G4/G5 and are celebrating finally being able to monitor their local system.

Anyway, I really didn't intend (in this thread or another) to wander so far from the purpose of the thread. I'm angered over this issue and feel that Uniden (and Whistler) handle it poorly, but I've already had my say.

 

[W4ELL]

Anyway, I really didn't intend (in this thread or another) to wander so far from the purpose of the thread. I'm angered over this issue and feel that Uniden (and Whistler) handle it poorly, but I've already had my say.

I am not sure what you expect to happen at this point. If I buy a product, after doing the research about said product (including verifying the return policy), and it doesn't meet my expectations, I return it. If you still own a product that you hate, that is on you. It isn't like Uniden (or Whistler) can flip a switch and make it work perfectly with simulcast systems all of the sudden. It also sounds like that you have found your salvation in the Unication voice pager... what do you need a scanner for anyway, right?

At this point, you could always sell both your Unication and the 436 and have enough to get an SDS100. :wink:

 

[jonwienke]

I would love to see someone describe how to do this. In the year that I've owned my 436, I have tried everything except a yagi antenna.

Which is the only consistently reliable solution for isolating a single transmitter from a simulcast site. Pretty much everything else is either snake oil, old wives' tales, or flat-out BS. The issue with simulcast is that a standard FM receiver can't handle mutiple signals on the same frequency, and that makes decoding digital bits from a simulcast signal troublesome.

The best way to solve the simulcast problem is to use a directional antenna so that the signal from one transmitter drowns out all the others via the capture effect. This isn't useful for mobile or handheld use, though.

A variable attenuator can be useful in some circumstances, if you can adjust the attenuation so that all but the strongest simulcast signals from a site are pushed below the receiver's noise floor, while leaving enough of the strongest signal to get decent decode. This is not always the case.Too little attenuation has no effect on the simulcast interference, and too much attenuation wipes out all the signals. You have to be able to adjust the attenuation to reliably find the Goldilocks zone. If the signal strength of the strongest two or three signals from a simulcast site are too close together, there is no Goldilocks zone--by the time you push the weaker signals below the noise floor, the strongest signal is too weak to get good decode. Most of the old wives' tale BS simulcast solutions are crude variations of signal attenuation methods (putting the antenna in a paint can, using a really tiny antenna, cutting the braid on your antenna coax, etc.). The reason most of those methods are BS is that they introduce a fixed degree of signal attenuation, which is unlikely to be the correct amount for a given situation, and can cause other problems. So in most cases, they will make reception worse, not better. Attenuation is also not useful for handheld or mobile use because the optimal amount of attenuation (if there is one) will be constantly changing as the antenna changes location.

The only other useful action is to manually set the digital threshold level for the site. Simulcast interferes with the algorithm used to auto-detect the correct threshold level, so if you manually set the correct threshold level, you can improve simulcast reception to some degree over using auto threshold mode.

 

[Jimco]

Thanks for those details. I appreciate it. I'm a hobbyist and don't at all consider myself an expert in these topics. I'm the perfect candidate for someone to get bitten by this issue. That said, I kept the 436 because my plan is to get the DMR upgrade at some point so I can monitor Careflight. Not sure when that will happen, but it's the plan.

Nice recommendation also on selling the G5 and 435 for an SDS100. I don't think I'll do that due to the whole twice bitten thing. I'll see how people like that radio after it comes out and make a decision later. It certainly does look like it will be a great radio to own if it solves the simulcast issue.

 

[E-542]

What I'd like to see to be honest, is a doing-away with this silly 'Scanner must be turned off to charge' nonsense. Is there even a good point to it I'm missing, or is it really just something annoying that has no purpose?
I've loved the 436 to be honest, and the only thing that might persuade me to get a SDS100 is if they do away with the 'Turn scanner off to charge your batteries' nonsense

 

[Eugene]

Unfortunately we all suffer for California as it is a supposed environmental law there or some such nonsense. A plug for "jonwienke"....I think he can do a mod for that.

Eugene KG4AVE

 

[jonwienke]

Unfortunately we all suffer for California as it is a supposed environmental law there or some such nonsense. A plug for "jonwienke"....I think he can do a mod for that.

That is correct: https://www.radioreference.com/apps/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=8835&cat=13

 

[radio3353]

... This isn't useful for mobile or handheld use, though....

BINGO! So what is the point?

 

[radio3353]

Wouldn't simulcast be a proprietary system weather analog or digital as no two systems are alike?

Houk

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

I don't think so. If it was proprietary no scanner would likely receive it. Like OpenSky.

 

[jonwienke]

BINGO! So what is the point?

People using the scanner as a base station.

 

[scannermike11]

it look like a 436hp with a new super display

this new radio look like a 436hp with more things i do not use now
my 2 436hp work great now