1080 vs 536HP RWC Simulcast Phoenix

Status
Not open for further replies.

AA6IO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
1,509
Location
Cerritos, CA (LA County)
Our daughter just gave birth to a son last Monday (our first grandchild), so wife and I are in Phoenix this week.
Brought 1080, 436HP, and 536HP. Listening to RWC Simulcast A and B with 536 HP and WS-1080 both with RS-800 antenna indoors on first floor of condo in Biltmore area near corner of Highland and 22nd East.
1080 has usual good audio quality, but overall, the P25 decode is better on 536HP.
There are some TGs that decode well on both units. However, overall, P25 decode better on these simulcast sites with the 536HP. Maybe with outside antenna might be more equal, but indoors with RS-800 on both, seems better on 536HP. As many of you know! I am from Los Angeles. But will be spending some more time here in Phoenix with new grandson.
Steve AA6IO
 

iMONITOR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
8,814
First off, congratulations to your daughter, you, and your entire family, on the birth of your new grandson! :)

Your findings are similar to what I've experienced in S.E. Michigan, monitoring the Macomb County, Michigan simulcast signals of MPSCS.

While I don't own the Whistler 1080, I've used the PSR-500, PSR-600, PSR-800, Radio Shack PRO-106, and Radio Shack PRO-197.

Both the BCD436HP, and BCD536HP, give full quieting, and have resolved the "Donald Duck", or underwater effect of monitoring the simulcast transmissions. This was something I never accomplished with the GRE/RS scanners.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top