Advice on HP-2 - still a good choice for desktop?

[jgriffter]

Hoping to get some comments/advice on the Home Patrol-2.

I have an SDS100 that is working well (reside in Manvel, TX/Brazoria). I wanted to get a desktop scanner for the office and use the SDS100 for mobile/travel. The HP-2 looked perfect for my needs and I actually bought one to try it out. For whatever reason it would receive NOTHING (and yes, I set it up correctly - attn off, full updated DB on, zip and GPS coordinates, Service types, squelch, different antennas, etc.). I worked with it for a few days and had no improvements - the signal meter rarely registered anything on it and when it did it was never more than two bars. All I could receive was an occasional single analog FD dispatch and when outside, an occasional TXWARN Harris PD dispatch. Meanwhile the SDS100 was picking up plenty. I sent the HP-2 back thinking I must have gotten a dud. But I really liked the screen and compact size - it was just the right form factor for what I was looking for.

I don't want to get an SDS-200; that would be larger footprint and more than I want for a desktop. Is the HP-2 still a good scanner in 2024 I would be willing to give another one a shot if it truly does still work well. I know it is weak on simulcast and I don't know if I am in an area where that will be a problem, but I surely should have been able to pick up more than what i did. I see other posts where folks say very positive things about the HP-2 sensitivity. Maybe I just got a bad one. Would be interested in thoughts from other HP-2 users.

Thanks in advance.

 

[jtwalker]

If you are in area with simulcast, then HP2 is not a good choice.

 

[rf_patriot200]

Hoping to get some comments/advice on the Home Patrol-2.

I have an SDS100 that is working well (reside in Manvel, TX/Brazoria). I wanted to get a desktop scanner for the office and use the SDS100 for mobile/travel. The HP-2 looked perfect for my needs and I actually bought one to try it out. For whatever reason it would receive NOTHING (and yes, I set it up correctly - attn off, full updated DB on, zip and GPS coordinates, Service types, squelch, different antennas, etc.). I worked with it for a few days and had no improvements - the signal meter rarely registered anything on it and when it did it was never more than two bars. All I could receive was an occasional single analog FD dispatch and when outside, an occasional TXWARN Harris PD dispatch. Meanwhile the SDS100 was picking up plenty. I sent the HP-2 back thinking I must have gotten a dud. But I really liked the screen and compact size - it was just the right form factor for what I was looking for.

I don't want to get an SDS-200; that would be larger footprint and more than I want for a desktop. Is the HP-2 still a good scanner in 2024 I would be willing to give another one a shot if it truly does still work well. I know it is weak on simulcast and I don't know if I am in an area where that will be a problem, but I surely should have been able to pick up more than what i did. I see other posts where folks say very positive things about the HP-2 sensitivity. Maybe I just got a bad one. Would be interested in thoughts from other HP-2 users.

Thanks in advance.

As JT said, it's not the best choice for areas with simulcast, but if that's not a issue, it's a Decent choice .

 

[hiegtx]

I don't want to get an SDS-200; that would be larger footprint and more than I want for a desktop. Is the HP-2 still a good scanner in 2024 I would be willing to give another one a shot if it truly does still work well. I know it is weak on simulcast and I don't know if I am in an area where that will be a problem, but I surely should have been able to pick up more than what i did. I see other posts where folks say very positive things about the HP-2 sensitivity. Maybe I just got a bad one. Would be interested in thoughts from other HP-2 users.

As jt & rf_patriot have already noted, the HP-2 is not the best choice for dealing with simulcast. However, there is at least some possibility that you might be able to use one.

I have an HP-2. Dallas (both city & county, as well as some of the smaller towns) has moved, in the last 18 months or so, to a regional system, NTIRN. Those cities use the two (simulcast) sites labeled as Dallas Layer 1 and Dallas Layer 2. Layer 1 , using 700Mhz frequencies) is used for public safety agencies (Police, Fire, EMS) for the Dallas County cities using these. Dallas Layer 2, which uses 800Mhz frequencies, many that were originally part of Dallas' (now deprecated) Moto Type 2 analog system. That's used for various city services other than public safety, such as public works & utilities, though I am seeing Dallas Fore Rescue dispatch using layer 2. (I think it may have slightly better coverage, though that's a guess on my part.)

In order to use my HP-2 on this system (as an additional scanner; I have an SDS100 that covers the system well), I've done several things. First, I have the SMA adapter on the scanner, along with a 90 degree elbow. This allows me to lay the antenna flat (horizontally to the desktop in my bedroom). I also am using an old "OEM" antenna, from one of my older, now unused, (mostly analog) scanners. The older, antenna, plus the 'flat' orientation, reduces sensitivity for the simulcast I would estimate that I am getting 60-70% of the activity using this. Not 100%, of course, but better tham "none".(The SDS100, of course, has no problems at all.) It also helps that my house has aluminum siding, which blocks, or at least attenuates, signals from multiple subsites of the simulcast layers. Foil-backed insulation in your house's walls can also help block what you don't work.

When dealing with simulcast, sometimes "less" antenna is better. Here's the site map for the Brazoria County Simulcast.

Manvel is almost directly north of that top location. A directional antenna, aimed at that site, probably would not help much, as the other two sites are in the same general direction, "behind" the top one. But, using "less" antenna, you might be able to negate the simulcast distortion. One other thing you could try is to use a paper clip as an antenna. That "poor" of an antenna might allow the HP-2 to work for you. Also, when dealing with simulcast, you may be able to find a "sweet spot" where the scanner works better. Sometimes, a move of only a foot or two can make a big difference. Neither the paper clip, nor trying moving the scanner location, would cost you anything but some of your time. More comments on what to try, as well as details on simulcast systems, can be found in the Wiki.

Trying to also get Houston Public Safety might pose a more difficult problem. The site listed as Houston Public Safety West Alvin appears to be simulcast. However, the site listed as Houston Public Safety Alvin appears to be a single site, not simulcast, But that might be one of what's been called 'fill-in sites', only carrying traffic when a field unit cannot reach one of the larger sites. You might ask that your thread be moved to the Texas forum. There are a number of Houston metro area members that might be better able to clarify that for you. They certainly would know the nuts and bolts of the system better than I do, from 250 miles away.

Should you wish to try the HP-2, and see if any of the suggestions work for you, purchase it from a dealer that does not whack you with a large restock fee if you decide to return it. Amazon is usually fairly forgiving on returns. At the price of the HP-2 shipping to you should be at no cost. For returns, unless you are an Amazon Prime member, you would be responsible for paying for shipping for the return. You could also check with other sources, such as ScannerMaster and Bearcat Warehouse, to verify their policy on returns.

 

[jgriffter]

Hiegtx
Thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate all the comments.

I knew that simulcast might be a problem with the HP-2. I am actually in the northern area of Manvel so even further away from the north Brazoria tower. On the first HP-2 I did try other antennas but did not try a "lesser antenna" like a stubby or paper clip. My biggest concern with the unit I got was that I was not receiving basically anything - analog or digital - either inside or outside, regardless of position or antenna, while the SDS100 was chatting away with both digital and analog.

Is your HP-2 "chatty" on other signals not simulcast (picking up a lot of other signal types)? I read posts of people saying they had great success with the HP-2 sensitivity. I am wondering if I got a bad unit and should try again. If it worked it would be the right match for me.

Thanks again for the responses.

 

[hiegtx]

Hiegtx
Thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate all the comments.

I knew that simulcast might be a problem with the HP-2. I am actually in the northern area of Manvel so even further away from the north Brazoria tower. On the first HP-2 I did try other antennas but did not try a "lesser antenna" like a stubby or paper clip. My biggest concern with the unit I got was that I was not receiving basically anything - analog or digital - either inside or outside, regardless of position or antenna, while the SDS100 was chatting away with both digital and analog.

Is your HP-2 "chatty" on other signals not simulcast (picking up a lot of other signal types)? I read posts of people saying they had great success with the HP-2 sensitivity. I am wondering if I got a bad unit and should try again. If it worked it would be the right match for me.

Thanks again for the responses.

My HP-2 works just fine on conventional channels and non-simulcast trunked systems. Even with the “lame” antenna setup that I use to deal with simulcast, it still does a fair job on signals that it’s designed to monitor. Before the changeover to the Phase II system, Dallas (city), Dallas County, Ellis County, and a number of the small cities in both Dallas & Ellis County were conventional and I used the HP-2 for all of them. It kept up with one of my 436HP’s channel for channel. It was not connected to an external antenna. I was using one of the Diamond antennas, such as the RH77CA, since the target conventional channels were VHF-high and UHF frequencies.

It’s possible that the one you had was defective, or perhaps there was a hard to spot antenna problem.

 

[dmfalk]

I own both. 😌 The main differences are that the HP-2 doesn't do simulcast, DMR, NDXN, or EDACS ProVoice, or have a Waterfall function. It could be said that the SDS series are effectively HP-3 & 4, with the other HP-series scanners being HP-2.5+. That said, the HP-2 is a worthy radio. (It's just a shame that Uniden deleted a lot of the HP-1/2 resources, even though they're still being bought new and used.) You can have both versions of Sentinel on your Windows machine, without confliction, and the Favorites Lists from both are interchangeable via import/export functions.

Although I use my SDS100 much more, now, it's good to have the HP-2 along for the ride, when I need it. 🙃 If you're concerned about reception, always use the WX radio function, to see if it's the antenna that might be the problem. Both should be about the same.

 

[rf_patriot200]

True, no Waterfall on the hp 2, but with the Extreme update, you do get the Band scope and RF power plot, as well as the Trunked system analyzer.

 

[Ubbe]

I believe that the HP1/2 uses the same receivers as in a 436, not the best to handle strong signals but not too bad. Sensitivity are good though. Enter those NOAA 162MHz frequencies and compare the signal bars on the scanners as those are pretty much equal in calibrated levels among all Uniden scanners. Switch antennas between scanners. The most common fault for a 436 scanner, and probably also HP1/2, are blown amplifier transistors in the front end. But that requires a very strong signal to be present, a transmitter next to the scanner antenna, or a static discharge happens when you touch the scanner.

/Ubbe

 

[dmfalk]

True, no Waterfall on the hp 2, but with the Extreme update, you do get the Band scope and RF power plot, as well as the Trunked system analyzer.

The Extreme update practically doubles the functionality of the HP-2! It's the best thing one can invest in with the HP-1/2.....

 

[jgriffter]

Thanks everyone for their responses on the HP2. I went ahead and ordered another HP2 and tried it out for several days. Unfortunately the second HP2 wasn’t much better for me than the first one I tried, even using the antenna suggestions from responses here. Must be my location and simulcast.

I returned the HP2 and broke down and got the SDS200. The SDS is working much better for me. It picks up much more and of course simulcast is better. I really wanted the HP2 to work but wasn’t meant to be. Thank you all for the input.