Best Air Band Scanner?
- Thread starter scnrfrq
- Start date
- Status
austinscan1
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2004
- Messages
- 138
Air scanner
I have a 245 and it's ok in the air band, but my Sony wavehawk, Icom R2 (my favorite), pro 528, and pro 82 are better from my experience. Keep that 245, I don't know what they're worth used, but it's a great trunker. Stop by radio scrap and get a 20-006 whip if you don't have one. Great antenna! Austin
I have a 245 and it's ok in the air band, but my Sony wavehawk, Icom R2 (my favorite), pro 528, and pro 82 are better from my experience. Keep that 245, I don't know what they're worth used, but it's a great trunker. Stop by radio scrap and get a 20-006 whip if you don't have one. Great antenna! Austin
Last edited:
N4JNW
Member
I've got a Pro-82 that I use for Airband and it's a pretty hot little scanner for aircraft. I actually bought it ONLY for aircraft.
For the price of $99.99, it's hard to beat! Ain't played with my 528 in the Airbands much, but if VHF-Hi is any indication, it should roast there too.
For the price of $99.99, it's hard to beat! Ain't played with my 528 in the Airbands much, but if VHF-Hi is any indication, it should roast there too.
lil_jimmy_norton
Member
I've always been partial to the PRO-2052 for airband stuff.
Turbo68
Member
Hello I use the following hand held Radios to monitor the Airbands.
ALINCO-DJX2000E,AOR-8200MK3,ICOM-R5,ICOM-R20,UNIDEN-396,YAESU-VR500.
Regards Lino (Melbourne Victoria)
ALINCO-DJX2000E,AOR-8200MK3,ICOM-R5,ICOM-R20,UNIDEN-396,YAESU-VR500.
Regards Lino (Melbourne Victoria)
I say if you want a good handheld airband receiver the Pro 43 or the Pro 97 are pretty good on the airband. For a base style scanner the 2045 does a excellent job and have heard good things about the 2052 as well.
Hope this helps
Fireant
Hope this helps
Fireant
zguy1243
Member
Yupiteru MVT7100. Best airband performance that you can get without going commercial.
w0fg
Member
I've often considered getting something like this just for aviation monitoring:
http://www.pilotessentials.com/prod...d/53/product_id/1337/nm/Vertex_VXA_220_Pro_VI
http://www.pilotessentials.com/prod...d/53/product_id/1337/nm/Vertex_VXA_220_Pro_VI
k4njk
Member
I purchased an Icom A4 airband transceiver and found the Uniden 245 haldheld to offer equal performance. I returned the Icom. I had a Yupi 7100 which had outstanding sensitivity but it would overload when I was near the control tower (poor selectivity). I could hear the ground frequency (121.75) clearly over the top of the tower frequency (120.9) when tuned to the tower. The Icom R20 is outstanding but expensive. Careful use of the squelch control will prevent overloading and the true dual watch allows you to monitor ground and tower at the same time with independent volume control.
For base monitoring the Icom R8500 is top of the line. Outstanding on both civil and milair. For civil the BC-895 has very good sensitivity but you cannot select AM in the 137-149Mhz range for milair. The BC-780 is a good all around performer but the volume varies with signal strength. The Pro-2042 is superb on milair.
Make sure you have a good antenna. The diamond RH77CA works well on the hand helds. A good 1/4 wave mobile antenna on the car makes a big difference and can be used for VHF, UHF and 800Mhz rather successfully. For home I've purchased some surplus TACO dedicated airband antennas from an FAA facility on eBay and they cannot be beat.
For base monitoring the Icom R8500 is top of the line. Outstanding on both civil and milair. For civil the BC-895 has very good sensitivity but you cannot select AM in the 137-149Mhz range for milair. The BC-780 is a good all around performer but the volume varies with signal strength. The Pro-2042 is superb on milair.
Make sure you have a good antenna. The diamond RH77CA works well on the hand helds. A good 1/4 wave mobile antenna on the car makes a big difference and can be used for VHF, UHF and 800Mhz rather successfully. For home I've purchased some surplus TACO dedicated airband antennas from an FAA facility on eBay and they cannot be beat.
timmer
Member
I have an ar3000 and an ar 2002 made by aor. Both very good, especially the 3000 when connected to an outdoor antenna (discone). No intermod or overload, and very sensitive.
eorange
♦RF Enabled Member♦
So here's a question: 10+ scanner models have been listed as "the best" or "very good" for air band.
How do you know it's "the best" or "very good"? This isn't a flame post, but rather a question to objectively measure performance. How do you guys do it?
I suspect that all responders on this thread - including myself - can hear air traffic on their scanner and assume "it's pretty good" for air band. So we say our model does great, naturally. But what makes your model better than another model? Are you comparing performance to something else?
For example: when I monitor mil air comms on my BC780, I hear very faint transmissions, so I assume I'm pulling in weak signals, so that's great. But where exactly are these aircraft in relation to me? Maybe this aircraft is 20 miles away, in which case the sensitivity would be pretty bad. Does this mean I'm not hearing the next aircraft 30 miles out? After all, you can't measure what you don't hear.
Thoughts?
How do you know it's "the best" or "very good"? This isn't a flame post, but rather a question to objectively measure performance. How do you guys do it?
I suspect that all responders on this thread - including myself - can hear air traffic on their scanner and assume "it's pretty good" for air band. So we say our model does great, naturally. But what makes your model better than another model? Are you comparing performance to something else?
For example: when I monitor mil air comms on my BC780, I hear very faint transmissions, so I assume I'm pulling in weak signals, so that's great. But where exactly are these aircraft in relation to me? Maybe this aircraft is 20 miles away, in which case the sensitivity would be pretty bad. Does this mean I'm not hearing the next aircraft 30 miles out? After all, you can't measure what you don't hear.
Thoughts?
I measure performance against radios I know using the same aerials. The best in my experience have been dedicated airband recievers with the Signal R-535 and R-532 outperforming any other airband or wideband radios I own. Next down the list is the Yupiteru VT-225 (though it has an image problem which would be a pain if I didn't know about it).
Even with the above I'd hesitate to say which is "The Best" as they all have pros and cons which sometimes mean they are not suitable for the job in hand.
Even with the above I'd hesitate to say which is "The Best" as they all have pros and cons which sometimes mean they are not suitable for the job in hand.
TinEar
Member
Erik, you've asked the right questions. Each time one of these "What is the best scanner" threads opens, there are as many replies as there are models of scanners - all claiming to be the very best you can get. Measured against what?...is the correct question. At least to my way of thinking, if you don't have a lab with sophisticated equipment to use, all you can try to do is measure performance by ear with radios side-by-side connected to the same antenna at the same time.
I've done those tests many times with just about every scanner on the market capable of receiving the air and MilAir bands in AM mode (118-144, 148-150.8, 225-399.975). I use the same antenna through an active multicoupler. For radios I don't own, I've invited friends to bring theirs and hook them up here. Each time we do those tests, one radio stands out over all others.
As far as I'm concerned, the Uniden 785 is at the very top of the pile. I'm speaking of scanners now, not general receivers like some of the Icoms I own which I don't consider to be scanners. For instance, my Icom R8500 will outperform anything I've ever used but it's simply not a scanner. And for the price, it damn well better perform better than a scanner!
For a very long time, the Uniden 780 got the reputation as the best for MilAir in particular and still seems to enjoy that reputation. But, at least in my case, the 785s outperform it every day since I use both here on a constant basis. I live in an urban area with lots of high powered transmitters saturating the spectrum so I need something that will not suffer desensing and interference from all those transmitters. My 780s get trashed by some of those signals that don't bother the 785s at all. Other scanners I own, I only use for specific purposes. For instance, the Radio Shack 2042 is a fair radio but I can only use it for monitoring military Command Posts within a reasonable distance of my location. It's not nearly sensitive enough for distant, weaker signals by comparison to several other radios in my arsenal.
Radio Shack radios in particular, are not very good for monitoring MilAir simply because most of them are not capable of the UHF 225-399.975 freqs or they won't switch to AM mode on the very important 138-144 mHz band. I believe I've had every Radio Shack scanner capable of monitoring the MilAir bands hooked up here on my antennas and they simply do not perform nearly as well as Uniden 780 or 785 scanners. I also own some older Radio Shack radios such as my 2005 that was a great scanner in its day and had great audio but it lacks sensitivity compared to today's scanners. It's still good for police/fire monitoring but lousy for MilAir. That goes for the 2004/2006 models too.
My bottom line would be that if you wanted just one scanner that's both sensitive enough to hear distant signals and not prone to getting wiped out by interference, it would be the Uniden 785 -- followed by the 780. If you use your scanner for trunked systems, the 785 can do that too in both analog and digital modes. However, once the fabled "rebanding" happens, the 785 will be useless for trunked public safety signals because Uniden will not support the changes that will need to be made. My reply to that is that I simply don't care. I use the 785s for MilAir listening and they'll always (well, at least until something better comes along) be the best thing out there for that purpose.
Yes, other makes and models can be used for listening to aircraft but in limited situations. You'll swear they are doing a great job - until you put it next to something that performs better. There are all kinds of exceptions for individual situations. For instance, if you live just a few miles from an airport you want to monitor, almost any scanner capable of the correct frequency range and mode will suffice. If you're interested in listening to distant signals, if you live in a noisy environment, if you want the capability of sufficient numbers of channels in your scanner, if things like a good display with alpha tags and easy to use buttons and knobs are important to you, get yourself a Uniden 785, or several of them.
The above thoughts are simply the result of monitoring MilAir for many, many years and the impressions I've formed while doing so. In the grand scheme of things, they are worth what you paid for them....zip.
I've done those tests many times with just about every scanner on the market capable of receiving the air and MilAir bands in AM mode (118-144, 148-150.8, 225-399.975). I use the same antenna through an active multicoupler. For radios I don't own, I've invited friends to bring theirs and hook them up here. Each time we do those tests, one radio stands out over all others.
As far as I'm concerned, the Uniden 785 is at the very top of the pile. I'm speaking of scanners now, not general receivers like some of the Icoms I own which I don't consider to be scanners. For instance, my Icom R8500 will outperform anything I've ever used but it's simply not a scanner. And for the price, it damn well better perform better than a scanner!
For a very long time, the Uniden 780 got the reputation as the best for MilAir in particular and still seems to enjoy that reputation. But, at least in my case, the 785s outperform it every day since I use both here on a constant basis. I live in an urban area with lots of high powered transmitters saturating the spectrum so I need something that will not suffer desensing and interference from all those transmitters. My 780s get trashed by some of those signals that don't bother the 785s at all. Other scanners I own, I only use for specific purposes. For instance, the Radio Shack 2042 is a fair radio but I can only use it for monitoring military Command Posts within a reasonable distance of my location. It's not nearly sensitive enough for distant, weaker signals by comparison to several other radios in my arsenal.
Radio Shack radios in particular, are not very good for monitoring MilAir simply because most of them are not capable of the UHF 225-399.975 freqs or they won't switch to AM mode on the very important 138-144 mHz band. I believe I've had every Radio Shack scanner capable of monitoring the MilAir bands hooked up here on my antennas and they simply do not perform nearly as well as Uniden 780 or 785 scanners. I also own some older Radio Shack radios such as my 2005 that was a great scanner in its day and had great audio but it lacks sensitivity compared to today's scanners. It's still good for police/fire monitoring but lousy for MilAir. That goes for the 2004/2006 models too.
My bottom line would be that if you wanted just one scanner that's both sensitive enough to hear distant signals and not prone to getting wiped out by interference, it would be the Uniden 785 -- followed by the 780. If you use your scanner for trunked systems, the 785 can do that too in both analog and digital modes. However, once the fabled "rebanding" happens, the 785 will be useless for trunked public safety signals because Uniden will not support the changes that will need to be made. My reply to that is that I simply don't care. I use the 785s for MilAir listening and they'll always (well, at least until something better comes along) be the best thing out there for that purpose.
Yes, other makes and models can be used for listening to aircraft but in limited situations. You'll swear they are doing a great job - until you put it next to something that performs better. There are all kinds of exceptions for individual situations. For instance, if you live just a few miles from an airport you want to monitor, almost any scanner capable of the correct frequency range and mode will suffice. If you're interested in listening to distant signals, if you live in a noisy environment, if you want the capability of sufficient numbers of channels in your scanner, if things like a good display with alpha tags and easy to use buttons and knobs are important to you, get yourself a Uniden 785, or several of them.
The above thoughts are simply the result of monitoring MilAir for many, many years and the impressions I've formed while doing so. In the grand scheme of things, they are worth what you paid for them....zip.
Last edited:
austinscan1
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2004
- Messages
- 138
My best scanners
Not the best, just best I,ve got. I will use the same antenna and same distant signal, (FLL tower) and side by side see which is best. Icom R2. Believe it or not pro 528 is very good. Antenna used is a Smiley 270A whip, 2m/440 19nch whip.
Not the best, just best I,ve got. I will use the same antenna and same distant signal, (FLL tower) and side by side see which is best. Icom R2. Believe it or not pro 528 is very good. Antenna used is a Smiley 270A whip, 2m/440 19nch whip.
kjfswkr
Member
scnrfrq said:
Buy an air band tranciever, they are cheap enough.
Kevin
Best Airband Scanner
There are over 6300 UHF freqs and 350 plus VHF. I have no idea how many VHF-Lo freqs are used by A/C. Throw in everything between 118-137 and you would have one big dB.
With these numbers what you want in a new MILAIR only scanner?
BMT
There are over 6300 UHF freqs and 350 plus VHF. I have no idea how many VHF-Lo freqs are used by A/C. Throw in everything between 118-137 and you would have one big dB.
With these numbers what you want in a new MILAIR only scanner?
BMT
spiritwolfpr
Member
Hello Friends:
I personaly like my old Radio Shack PRO-60 it has Civilian
air and Military Air and I love it.
I personaly like my old Radio Shack PRO-60 it has Civilian
air and Military Air and I love it.
- Status
Similar threads
