BCD536HP - Slow Scan - My Workaround

[RF23]

So here is another video. This time comparing the 536hp to the 436hp. Its actually embarrassing. The handheld is seconds ahead. I wouldn't be able to follow the traffic if I didn't have the 436hp running. Both radios are on hold on a single conventional P25 channel.

Another even better video. - YouTube

None of what I will list will probably help but until you try all possible things you can't be sure which one(s) may be part of the problem. Normally, you want both items as much alike as possible and the difference between them is hopefully the one thing that is different, so getting everything possible alike but the two different radios is usually the goal.

I noticed that the 536 seemed to have no bar to 5 bars of signal strength while the 436 seemed to be one bar consistently. I take it they are on different antennas?

There may have been a delay to receive with the 536 and therefore the no bar was slow to get to 5 bars?

Any simulcast problems with this system? A strong signal could cause no audio or a delay in decode.

Are both on AC?

Are both connected to a PC via the USB cable? The 536 may have a problem when connected via USB to a PC in serial mode.

Does the 536 have the WiFi Dongle driver installed?

 

[shonc182]

I get the frustration with this issue and have spent a lot of time reading through and following many threads. I am comparing my 536HP to an old 785D and the difference is way worse than even yours appears in the second video - my 536 willl occasionally miss an entire transmission when both units are held on the same channel. I have also held the 785D on a channel with a long conversation going on and watched the 536 miss it on multiple passes. Where I see my issues are on analog Motorola Type II Simulcast systems - this is 90+% of what I listen to.

I have seen this conditions described elsewhere as "delayed unmuting" and as far as I can tell there is no workaround or correction that can be made to make it better (for me). I have tried a couple things that I have seen - most notably adjusting the squelch. Unless I have missed something, I believe I am in the situation of waiting (and hoping) for a firmware fix.

 

[tbakken]

N0UDG...the five bars and no bars...is a symptom of the overall problem. No receive. Yes the 536HP is on a better antenna.... Trying to make this thing work.

This is not a simulcast system...P25 phase 1 simple single frequency.

Not connected to PC...436HP on battery and 536HP on AC. Not that it matters....it just doesn't receive.

 

[LIScanner101]

Has Uniden formally/officially acknowledged this as something that MUST be addressed by firmware or maybe even hardware?

 

[RF23]

N0UDG...the five bars and no bars...is a symptom of the overall problem. No receive. Yes the 536HP is on a better antenna.... Trying to make this thing work.

This is not a simulcast system...P25 phase 1 simple single frequency.

Not connected to PC...436HP on battery and 536HP on AC. Not that it matters....it just doesn't receive.

This is interesting but I bet for the people who are experiencing it really frustrating.

Since this is not a simulcast problem then you might consider the remote possibility of frontend overload/desense on the 536. I think the quickest way to find out would be to put the 436 on the outside antenna and the 536 on an indoor antenna to see if you still get this same problem.

Some of the other things I listed on my first post might increase the CPU load which may make the scanner slower to respond to received signals or to keypad input (WiFi Dongle Driver & USB cable hooked to a PC).

In addition, the question of if both were on AC is related to any possible "ground loops" which may or may not produce and audio sound but can really be bad for CPU and memory operations, like it can actually damage them not just interfere with their proper operation.

I think that helping to eliminate some possibilities as the cause of this apparent slow response of the 536 (if that is what it is) helps us (since I will wait to see how all this works out before I buy the 536, I already have the 436) and Uniden.

 

[tbakken]

Uniden has not commented to me... Or anything about this problem to my knowledge.

I wouldn't buy a 536HP at this point.

I have tried different antenna configurations. Its just not a receive issue with respect to how much signal is getting to the BNC jack on the back of the box. Its the box.

If this radio doesn't work with the wifi dongle I might as well purchase a 436hp and call it good. I will disconnect the wifi and check to see if that's it though. No USB cable plugged in.

I have been running the 436hp to compare and I really like it. Very nice interface and display. Uniden has created something awesome with the handheld. The receiving problem aside I am not getting the same feel from the 536hp. First thing I noticed was the usb connector blocks the enter button which just so happens to be the next thing you have to press after plugging in the usb! The buttons are more difficult to hit and the knob is touchy. All in all though if the receive gets fixed and the app works as advertised it will be a good radio. But if you don't want the wifi I would just buy a handheld.

 

[tbakken]

I tried removing the wifi dongle. Still only gets maybe 75% of the transmissions. Uniden better acknowledge this problem soon or I am returning this thing!

 

[tbakken]

Found on another thread to set all P25 channels to FM NOT NFM. Seems to work. Now I am hearing everything!

 

[dispatcher812]

I changed my settings for the CT State Police ( Connecticut State Police Trunking System, Statewide, Connecticut - Scanner Frequencies) to FM. I noticed that it seems to hang on the site LONGER then before. I only have two talk groups programmed for the main sites I am interested. I do have multiple sites programmed but controlled via the GPS. It did seem though that I was receiving more but I may have been missing other things since it hangs longer on each site. I am going to make a new test profile and leave the CSP as it is in the Database. I did A LOT of rearranging and reconfiguring to get it the way I wanted. I am wondering if that has something to do with it. I also noticed that at times it will pick up activity on a TG: the scanner will stop, the LED indicated will light up, I will see what TG is active but nothing comes out. I do have full bars.

 

[USASA]

SLOW SCAN

Hi All!

I just purchased a BCD536HP (one of 5 other scanners) but the scan rate appears to be very slow as compared my Trunk Tracker IV, Trunk Tracker III and the Pro-106. I have only had the 536HP for 2 days now. I have experimented with many different settings to no avail. Just looking for some good advice on how to speed it up. I hope it is possible to do so. What I am scanning is El Paso County and City of Colorado springs in Colorado. Good advice will never be turned down. I looked at the other posts, but nothing helped. Thanks.

PS: Love this radio, audio is outstanding!

Al
USASA

 

[jonwienke]

The first thing to realize is that on trunked systems, you are NOT scanning talkgroups, you are scanning SITES. Programming talkgroups does not affect scan speed in any way, it merely enables the scanner to identify traffic it finds when scanning sites.

The key to effective scanning of trunked systems is to ensure that you are only scanning sites within reception range. This means that Location Control must be turned on if scanning from a favorite list, and your location needs to be set accurately. Using a zip code to set location is good enough in many situations, but in rural areas it can be off by miles. Check your actual location coordinates with Google Maps and copy them to Sentinel.

 

[W4EMS]

So Jon,
Would programming all of the region's cc's into one site (middle TN TACN) perhaps increase the speed or maybe slow it down more as it checks each one? Will it stop for 1-2 seconds even if the cc is not received?
Doc

 

[jonwienke]

So Jon,
Would programming all of the region's cc's into one site (middle TN TACN) perhaps increase the speed or maybe slow it down more as it checks each one? Will it stop for 1-2 seconds even if the cc is not received?
Doc

That's the worst possible way to scan a trunked system. You'll be scanning every site in the system regardless of whether it's in range or not. Program each site with the frequencies used at that site, and make sure the GPS coordinates for the site are correct. The 1-2 second delay only applies to frequencies with a control channel signal, but every other frequency still takes some time to scan. If you scan every frequency in every site in a statewide system, you're going to bog the scanner down.

 

[hiegtx]

So Jon,
Would programming all of the region's cc's into one site (middle TN TACN) perhaps increase the speed or maybe slow it down more as it checks each one? Will it stop for 1-2 seconds even if the cc is not received?
Doc

While I'm not Jon, what you are asking might, slightly, increase the scanning speed. However, throwing all the control channels into one site has negative side effects.

The issue is the way Uniden scanners handle control channels. The Uniden scanners will find and use the first control channel they can decode. Then, every time that system comes back up in your scan rotation, the radio will keep using that channel as long as it can still receive it. It won't look for another active channel, nor will it necessarily settle on the "best" control frequency. It finds one that works, then stays with it until the signal is unusable. So, the frequencies for other sites, including neighboring sites from the CC it grabs, will not be checked until signal from the first site is lost. Once that first site is gone, the scanner will latch onto the next active CC it hits, and hang with it until signal is lost. If you have multiple sites of interest, then add them as individual sites, not as a condensed mega-site. That way the scanner would evaluate each site in turn for activity.

You're better off to leave them as individual sites, but limit the number being scanned at any one time. You could do that via location control, either by entering your location when you were going to be in a specific area for a while, or by using a GPS unit to provide real time location data. Alternatively, you could group the more distant sites into regions, all with the same site key, turning a geographical group on, or off, depending on where you were.

 

[W4EMS]

The 1-2 second delay only applies to frequencies with a control channel signal, but every other frequency still takes some time to scan. If you scan every frequency in every site in a statewide system, you're going to bog the scanner down.

Right, would not add every frequency only known control frequencies and only for a 5-6 county region. As it is now it ready takes significant time to scan the sites separately (each site only has the one or rarely two cc's). Not at a point to add gps unless certain it will increase scan speed. Even when set as a base the 436 lages the 600 significantly on TACN with same number of cc's.

My GRE 600 smokes the 436 but as you know doesn't do the newer modalities.

Was just thinking out loud and appreciate the feedback.

 

[jonwienke]

Location Control speeds scanning by only scanning sites within range. Its unlikely you will be able to receive 6 counties' worth of sites from any single location. Trying to do so will bog the scanner down pointlessly.

 

[werinshades]

Right, would not add every frequency only known control frequencies and only for a 5-6 county region. As it is now it ready takes significant time to scan the sites separately (each site only has the one or rarely two cc's). Not at a point to add gps unless certain it will increase scan speed. Even when set as a base the 436 lages the 600 significantly on TACN with same number of cc's.

My GRE 600 smokes the 436 but as you know doesn't do the newer modalities.

Was just thinking out loud and appreciate the feedback.

This method does work as I've been using it since I've had my 436. I put in the "known" control channels and their alternates in one site and separate the departments/districts by group quick keys. When I'm driving, I don't want to be looking down at my scanner so I activate the known groups before I'm on the road, then just have to activate the Favorite list. Scanner picks up the strongest control channel, which will most likely be the district I'm traveling through.

 

[jonwienke]

That is what GPS is for. You should be driving while driving, not playing with the scanner toggling quick keys and favorite lists. You're basically texting while driving.

That method still bogs down the scanner scanning out-of-range stuff. Letting GPS toggle sites means you are scanning less stuff, and only stuff the scanner can receive.

 

[werinshades]

That is what GPS is for. You should be driving while driving, not playing with the scanner toggling quick keys and favorite lists. You're basically texting while driving.

That method still bogs down the scanner scanning out-of-range stuff. Letting GPS toggle sites means you are scanning less stuff, and only stuff the scanner can receive.

Thanks Dad...lol! I don't use GPS, nor do I upload from the Radio Reference Database. I'm a RR rebel! I'm old school and self-program and prefer my method which has been working for years. It's just another option that can be used.