BCD536HP Ethernet Adapter??

[unidencomguy]

Has anyone tried using a USB to Ethernet CAT 5 adapter on the Uniden BCD536HP??
Curious to know if I can use this to add hard wire Ethernet connection to the BCD536HP.
Thanks,

 

[kruser]

Has anyone tried using a USB to Ethernet CAT 5 adapter on the Uniden BCD536HP??
Curious to know if I can use this to add hard wire Ethernet connection to the BCD536HP.
Thanks,

I know people have tried plus many would love to have the ability of hardwired vs wireless but I don't think it was ever done.
The 536 handles all the handshaking protocols with the wireless dongle so any type of wired ethernet dongle would need to emulate the Uniden wireless dongle before it could work.
Somebody handy with an Arduino or Raspberry Pi type device could probably make something work. I'd love to have one myself. Living in an apartment complex with every person here running their own wireless WAPs and routers at full power makes for some interesting methods or tricks to keep wireless reliable, not to mention, secure.
I must keep a WAP within about two feet of my Uniden 536 WiFi dongles so they maintain a solid and reliable connection. I seriously considered coupling my WAPs antenna(s) with the 536 dongles using transformers as the WiFi interference gets so bad. I wish Uniden's dongle at least included the 5 GHz band. That band is lightly used here compared to 2.4 GHz. My 536s are the only wireless devices I use here that connect to my ethernet based LAN.
If I need to put my cell phone on WiFi, I must also place it right next to my WAP but I usually just let it do its thing over its cell connections data services as I normally restrict my WAP from access to my ethernet based LAN and the internet.

 

[eaf1956]

What is really odd is that people wanted the SDS200 to have a dongle like the 536. They don't like the wired LAN port. I think or wish that when I had a 536 that it had a wired connection as well as the dongle.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[kruser]

What is really odd is that people wanted the SDS200 to have a dongle like the 536. They don't like the wired LAN port. I think or wish that when I had a 536 that it had a wired connection as well as the dongle.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

How true!

If anything, Uniden should have offered both a wired and a wireless dongle with the 536 models. I'd sure think that code could have been written into the firmware fairly easy. Most of the code was already done to support the wireless dongle.
I suppose we will never get it all though and if we did, somebody would still complain about that somehow!

 

[dfw1193]

Still waiting on the supposed documentation on the sds ethernet port, thats been said to be in progress since the sds 200 came out.

 

[KR7CQ]

Bump on this thread...has anyone had any success with USB to LAN? 2.4 GHz is a war zone in my neighborhood, and even with the dongle close to the router antennas, there are occasional drops. I'm pretty diligent about scanning to see what 2.4 GHz channels surrounding neighbors are using, and I try to stay on a channel with minimal nearby channel interference, but most people use the default "auto" setting for router channels, meaning that they change channels all the time and before you know it someone always ends up on the same channel as I am on.

I also agree that 5 GHz WIFI would have been a huge improvement, but in fairness it was still somewhat new when the 536 came out. I never have interference problems on devices that operate in that band. There are less people on it, there is wider channel bandwidth / better spacing, and 5 GHz has a shorter effective range due to the higher frequencies. I'm considering a USB extension chord at this point so that I can place the dongle maybe six inches from the router antennas, at least on the 536 that sits in my main cabinet. That won't work with my other 536's which aren't able to be super close to a router. I may have to install hard-wired access points near those dongles.

 

[Ubbe]

It's the "auto" routers that will kill you. It's somewhat agreed on that you use channel 1-6-11 to not interfere neigbouring channels, but routers set to auto squeeze themselves in between those channels and create havoc. WiFi are ment to share a channel with several users and they signal between them so that one or several occupied slots are not used by anyone else. There's someting like 30 or 50 slots available on a channel and one slot are enough for the slow data speed from a BCD536. My WiFI net works best when on the same channel as my neighbours as they sync with each other but if someone has a "wild" auto router it uses a "free" neighbouring channel and my WiFi drops in range and the furthest away surveilance WiFi cameras drop their signal.

It's a constant changing scenario each day with those auto routers. I don't know who sets them up that way that will only create problems for everyone. The manuals I've seen for routers always suggest to set to any of the 1-6-11 channels and not use auto.

/Ubbe

 

[iMONITOR]

Has anyone played around with the location & position of the WiFi dongle? Possibly shielding it on one side or the other or a metallic reflector?

 

[Ubbe]

Wrapping a couple of layers of aluminum cooking foil around it drasticly reduced the range in my dongle, so I could test that it needs to see another WiFi network before starting an Access Point Mode of its own.

/Ubbe

 

[jjbond]

It's only 2.4Gig that's super busy, 5Gig band is less busy, if you have a wireless card in a Windows 10 machine, download WIFIAnalyzer from the Microsoft Store, it's free and you can see which band is less busy and what channel, then you can lock your router to that channel. You can put it on an Android device as well.