800Mhz scanners

[Josh]

Is anyone concerned that the new digital scanner will act much like other 800Mhz scanners- poor sensitivity on the 800Mhz band?

I have a Radio Shack PRO-2026 and it stinks trying to monitor 800Mhz as well as 460UHF because the receiver keeps getting worse and worse as the frequencies go up and up.

It's so bad that the radio receives 800MHz much better without any antenna than with it. Now that's lossy.

I've read elsewhere that most scanners are like this.


-Josh

 

[Guest]

If the radio is receiving better with no antenna, then the problem does not lie with the radios' receiver sensitivity - it lies in your antenna infrastructure. If you go out and purchase a mobile 800 MHz antenna with a magnetic mount from a local Motorola shop, go home and stick it on a pizza sheet on top of a bookshelf and hook it up to the radio, I bet your reception will improve exponentially. Same thing with UHF reception - find an antenna that works best in that band and hook it up. Frequently, stock antennas on radios are "deaf".

 

[ThreeElevn1]

i use a PRO-94 and it works fine on 800MHz with the rubber ducky that came with it. i live a good 5-10 miles away from the citycounty CC repeater. Handhelds may be more sensitive than basemobile. anyone have any idea?

 

[Josh]

If the radio is receiving better with no antenna, then the problem does not lie with the radios' receiver sensitivity - it lies in your antenna infrastructure. If you go out and purchase a mobile 800 MHz antenna with a magnetic mount from a local Motorola shop, go home and stick it on a pizza sheet on top of a bookshelf and hook it up to the radio, I bet your reception will improve exponentially. Same thing with UHF reception - find an antenna that works best in that band and hook it up. Frequently, stock antennas on radios are "deaf".

I actually think that the radio's design is at fault.

I had awful reception even with an 800Mhz Yagi directional antenna pointed right at the site. I ran it through about 10' of RG8 cable. My Maxtrac800 loved in and grabbed those signals from afar quite nicely. A little static here and there (from a system 25 miles away) but still very nice so antenna infrastructure was not the real issue.

However, the radio did a fine job receiving those lower frequency signals, like VHF (using a wide-band omni antenna).

It would seem that the higher the frequency is, the more signal loss occurs in the radio and worse it works with any antenna.

-Josh

 

[RADIOGUY2002]

Hints

Wattage is a issue, how close you are to the tower site, Yogi directional antennas are not the best in less used for a speffic band and near the site like the equipment in the movie of the Neogiter, the new one with Sammuel L. Jackson. But like Matthew E. Engelbrecht said stock antennas arent always the greats, find other soultions if its a system hard to monitor. Your height of your antenna makes a difference to, usually base put out more power, so its easier to hear the systems better. Whille handhelds are bad for this because they dont have enough power. Lets take for examaple out here by me, O'hare airport vs. the city of chicago public saftey systems, both are type II, 800mhz systems. City Services is great coverage even 10miles out of its intend county, cook. Whille O'hare is on the biltz have the time and coverage is about 15miles out in each direction, however there use conventional channels as well just in case smothing happens that cover out of its intend county to, The trs system is low watted on purpose, if you think about you'll get it. Just some brief examples on the topic.

 

[Josh]

Re: Hints

Wattage is a issue, how close you are to the tower site, Yogi directional antennas are not the best in less used for a speffic band and near the site

Actually for me, Yagi antennas have made the difference between hearing things and not hearing things. If there is a specific site you want to monitor all you have to do it point it at it and if it's good enough and what you want to receive isn't too far off then it can be done.

For me, however, Yagis have worked best on VHF where they've made the difference between getting 15 miles out of simplex mobiles to 35 or so on the same 20' tall pole where my antennas are mounted.

-Josh

 

[RADIOGUY2002]

VHF, they've made the difference

I glad to get more info on it, the yagi are ammed at a speciffic site or area of coverage is that the idea your going for? Or are you going for area wide coverage 360 degres? In which case you would need a onmi-directional antenna. Yea towers make a huge difference, are you in a crowd area or out in the boundies thats make a difference to obvisouly. What kind of wattage are you pulling? My antenna when I get it will be 2 stories off the ground and put on a pole type structure, especially living near the city-lol.

 

[Josh]

Re: VHF, they've made the difference

I glad to get more info on it, the yagi are ammed at a speciffic site or area of coverage is that the idea your going for? Or are you going for area wide coverage 360 degres? In which case you would need a onmi-directional antenna. Yea towers make a huge difference, are you in a crowd area or out in the boundies thats make a difference to obvisouly. What kind of wattage are you pulling? My antenna when I get it will be 2 stories off the ground and put on a pole type structure, especially living near the city-lol.

Yagi antennas are for directional coverage. While it will work o.k. on stronger signals in any direction, the focus is where it's pointed. What kind of wattage am I pulling? I don't know. I don't transmit on 800Mhz. For VHF I usually have a 45 watt radio hooked up to it. And with expected 9 or aso DB gain out of it, the ERP is significantly higher.

-Josh