A feature that I think scanners need

[KC9VZV]

This is an idea I've been sitting on for a while, and I don't think it exists but I think it would be really helpful it it was available. (Please let me know if I just missed something and it is available. )

I think there should be a feature where you can have 2 different scanners monitoring the exact same channels on the same systems (let's say this is a conventional system for now) and when the first scanner stops on one channel, it sends a message to the other scanner so the other scanner will temporarily lock-out the channel that the first scanner has stopped on. This temporary lock-out on the second scanner would only exist as long as the first scanner is stopped on that particular channel. When the first scanner starts scanning again, the channel is unlocked on the second scanner. Theoretically, it would be great if you could do this on even more than 2 scanners, but I just used 2 for this example. This way, those of us who like to listen to more than one scanner at once don't have to manually designate (for example) one for state police, one for county sheriff, one for city police, one for city fire, etc, etc, etc...
Does this make sense?
Let me know what you think.

 

[gr8rcall]

Yeah! That WOULD be cool!

 

[JoeyC]

I think it would make for a scanner that is at least double the cost of single one (since there are now 2 scanners in one) and that the sales of such an expensive scanner would be nil.

 

[KC9VZV]

I think it would make for a scanner that is at least double the cost of single one (since there are now 2 scanners in one) and that the sales of such an expensive scanner would be nil.

Well I wasn't saying to sell 2 scanners in one, I am just thinking make a cable or something that you can connect to multiple scanners to enable this feature.

 

[QDP2012]

Cool idea. It might be easier (less administrative procedure) to suggest to the ARC..., Win..., Free..., etc. software makers that they update their software to control multiple radios from one overall software session. When that is possible, then they could make the software handle the channel-supression you describe, even without having to reprogram the lockout settings of the actual radios. Of course, this limits the functionality to a computer-hosted environment, as opposed to a mobile/portable environment that uses no computer.

 

[KC9VZV]

Cool idea. It might be easier (less administrative procedure) to suggest to the ARC..., Win..., Free..., etc. software makers that they update their software to control multiple radios from one overall software session. When that is possible, then they could make the software handle the channel-supression you describe, even without having to reprogram the lockout settings of the actual radios. Of course, this limits the functionality to a computer-hosted environment, as opposed to a mobile/portable environment that uses no computer.

Very good points. I know I would probably only use this for home monitoring, not in the car or out-and-about with my handheld scanners, so that wouldn't be a problem for me. But all good points.

 

[Jimru]

I believe this feature can be enabled by using the device mentioned in the following post in another thread in this forum:

http://forums.radioreference.com/showthread.php?p=1943374#post1943374

You can read detailed specs on the unit here:

http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/filters/2917.html

 

[QDP2012]

I believe this feature can be enabled by using the device mentioned in the following post in another thread in this forum:

How do you listen to two scanners? - The RadioReference.com Forums

You can read detailed specs on the unit here:

NCS 3230 Receive Console, New Communications Solutions NCS-3230 Multi-RX

Looks like an interesting unit. Too bad that vendor marks it as "discontinued".

 

[fxdscon]

This is an idea I've been sitting on for a while, and I don't think it exists but I think it would be really helpful it it was available. (Please let me know if I just missed something and it is available. )

I think there should be a feature where you can have 2 different scanners monitoring the exact same channels on the same systems (let's say this is a conventional system for now) and when the first scanner stops on one channel, it sends a message to the other scanner so the other scanner will temporarily lock-out the channel that the first scanner has stopped on. This temporary lock-out on the second scanner would only exist as long as the first scanner is stopped on that particular channel. When the first scanner starts scanning again, the channel is unlocked on the second scanner. Theoretically, it would be great if you could do this on even more than 2 scanners, but I just used 2 for this example. This way, those of us who like to listen to more than one scanner at once don't have to manually designate (for example) one for state police, one for county sheriff, one for city police, one for city fire, etc, etc, etc...
Does this make sense?
Let me know what you think.

There is software for that:

http://forums.radioreference.com/sc...-program-protocol-improvement-slavedscan.html


.

 

[QDP2012]

There is software for that:
http://forums.radioreference.com/sc...-program-protocol-improvement-slavedscan.html
.

Thanks!

 

[Jimru]

Looks like an interesting unit. Too bad that vendor marks it as "discontinued".

Hmmm, didn't notice that on the iPhone screen, too small!

I guess that's why they don't advertise in the hobby mags anymore.

 

[gmclam]

My problem with that feature is the number of scanners going at once and the number of "equivalent" channels being scanned that are the same. For example; one scanner is working Sacramento county trunked system, one the city trunked system and another the Roseville trunked system. Yet a 4th scanner is monitoring conventional FIRE. When there is a fire dispatch at least two scanners stop on the same audio but they are different frequencies (or talkgroups). This happens with just two scanners running.

I see no real point in scanning EXACTLY the same conventional frequencies on two separate scanners. The reason I'm using multiple scanners is because conversations are missed on trunked systems unless a scanner sits on the control channel "constantly". If/when I add a 5th scanner, I'll split the conventional stuff so that, for example, one is Fire and one is CHP. Unless something is patched/etc, no redundancy. Of course if there's a patch this lock-out scheme doesn't work.

 

[QDP2012]

I see no real point in scanning EXACTLY the same conventional frequencies on two separate scanners. The reason I'm using multiple scanners is because conversations are missed on trunked systems unless a scanner sits on the control channel "constantly". If/when I add a 5th scanner, I'll split the conventional stuff so that, for example, one is Fire and one is CHP. Unless something is patched/etc, no redundancy. Of course if there's a patch this lock-out scheme doesn't work.

I had similar thoughts with regards of radio-assignments if a group of scanners were regularly positioned near a computer. But, if I were to have a portable scanner which was similar or exactly the same as a desktop/mobile scanner, I might temporarily include it in the group at the desk. If, for example, a "bank" (in both radios) has the fire related channels/TGs (including dispatch, response, tac, etc.), it could be useful to have the radios communicate to one another (or the computer software handle this) so that the radios don't both get "hung" on a specific fire channel while scanning the fire "bank". This would help avoid constant radio-lockout adjustments if multiple fire incidents were happening.

Just a thought.