Best scanner to look into, not SDS Series?

[chad_96]

The Colorado State system seems similar to my home system, in Minnesota, ARMER. We have a lot of simulcast in the Metro and then more so single sites in the rural/outstate areas. My old Radio Shack scanners don't work at all for most of our sites, minus a few. I run Unication G5's in addition to my Department radios. I too played the game with my Uniden 436/536HP with Simulcast and non Simulcast sites, and it was kind-of a lost cause. I ended up selling them, and have considered getting an SDS, but haven't yet. I would say to keep your SDS's, and perhaps start from scratch. If you have Facebook, there are many scanner groups, and one gentlemen in particular, who is extremely good at programming, and he is able to help a lot of folks with their issues. Send me a PM if you'd like some more information. I'd be happy to help in anyway I can.

Thanks for the reply.

I'm still debating on ditching the SDS series. I have been told by a few people if I don't have simulcast and don't need the SDS series, get rid of them. Those are folks who are very active on these forums and like many very knowledgeable.

Main reason, I don't need anything for simulcast (it appears), and the receivers are much better in other models, that I've been told to look at. I'm in a bit of a crappy area with signal issues and interference. This being their reasoning as to suggesting to ditch the SDS scanners for other models.

So, in limbo on what I'm going to do overall.

I was a member of a few FB groups. Still am on a couple. Of you're speaking of Frank Belcher, I'm in a couple of his groups. If you're speaking of Mark Levine, he's a P.O.S. who I called out and he banned me for proving factual points on his "Huge groups" that are no different than the rest. But, thanks for the help and insight.

 

[chad_96]

You'll have to see if the site you want to monitor is actually simulcast. I know at least some of it isn't I was just out there visiting my daughter in Greeley and while Weld county was simulcast on the front range system the DTRS site I was listening too was not simulcast. I actually monitored that when first got there on my 536 prior to getting my Unication pager re-programmed. I don't remember which site it was though. "Something" mountain. I know that won't help out there a lot.

Yeah, I think after reading more I have been confused by the Colorado DTRS system only "operating similar" to the way simulcast works, but not truly being simulcast. That of course unless it is a simulcast noted area.

 

[kb9klc]

So yes those counties are included and on the state dtrs system. As well as CSP.. simulcast systems you aren't likely to find anything better than the sds200 to scan those systems.

Where are you getting the sites in Otero are simulcast? Those are not a simulcast system. Just like when I was out there and listened to Buckhorn Mountain, my 536 received it fine, not simulcast, it was a single site. I haven't looked at the other county he mentioned yet but the two sites in Otero are not simulcast. Edit: The systems in Bent CO are not simulcast either.

 

[kb9klc]

Yeah, I think after reading more I have been confused by the Colorado DTRS system only "operating similar" to the way simulcast works, but not truly being simulcast. That of course unless it is a simulcast noted area.

This....Exactly this. If it's simulcast it will say so. There are 2 sites in Otero and 3 ( I think I saw) in Bent CO, none of those sites are simulcast. It appears there are 5 simulcast areas doing a quick search with Command F (or control F on a windows box) found only 5 sites that say they are simulcast.

 

[kb9klc]

So, you're SDS200 was your best option. No other radio does well on any of the simulcast systems on Colorado DTRS. I had a BC436HP before I got the SDS100 when I lived there and it was missing so many transmissions and cutting off half of comms. I'd stick with your SDS200 as you aren't going to get any better reception via those others. Especially not the BC436HP.
Why all the filter fighting? I've never set any filters on my SDS100 and had great results.

No other "scanner" does as well. Then enter the Unication voice pagers.... Question did you have the same antenna on the same scanner at the same time for your test? (the same make and model I realize you can't have the same screw on antenna on both scanners at the same time). Which system were you testing on if I could ask. I want to see if perhaps you had simulcast but the OP may not have that where he's trying to scan. Sure, should he travel to one of the 5 areas in CO that have simulcast then ya, if he needs to stay with a scanner go with an SDS. I'm really trying to find out what you were listening to out there where there was such a great difference "IF" it wasn't simulcast.
I had great luck with my Unication G5 and G4 out there when I was there, listening to the Weld CO simulcast on that Front Range system, on the G4 and DTRS on the 536 prior to getting it programmed into my G5. Then I moved the 536 back to some analog scanning.

 

[chad_96]

This....Exactly this. If it's simulcast it will say so. There are 2 sites in Otero and 3 ( I think I saw) in Bent CO, none of those sites are simulcast. It appears there are 5 simulcast areas doing a quick search with Command F (or control F on a windows box) found only 5 sites that say they are simulcast.

Yeah...

You see where things can be confused very easily. Not knocking anyone for their help, but I've dealt with everyone and their 20 different "This is how it works!" For awhile.

Definitely can be confusing at best sometimes.

Anyways, done my research after and found that the State of Colorado DTRS system simply "works similar" to the way simulcast operates, along with some minor explanation. Makes perfect sense..

 

[kb9klc]

Yeah...

You see where things can be confused very easily. Not knocking anyone for their help, but I've dealt with everyone and their 20 different "This is how it works!" For awhile.

Definitely can be confusing at best sometimes.

Anyways, done my research after and found that the State of Colorado DTRS system simply "works similar" to the way simulcast operates, along with some minor explanation. Makes perfect sense..

I'm absolutely sure everyone here is trying to help, I'd say 99% of us don't want you, or anyone else, to buy something they can't use in their area. I know nothing about the SDS programming but when I use Sentinel on my 536 and the 436 I sold, honestly I think that same stuff can do the SDS stuff so I guess they use the same stuff. Whatever you decide, good luck in your decision. IF you can understand the limitations of it and you're looking for something smaller than the HH scanners, look into the Unication pagers. Somewhat of a programming learning curve but, even traveling if you understand the limitations they're great. (and really small). Just another thing to help you "not decide" what to do LOL. EDIT: There are 5 simulcast sites in CO on DTRS, I don't know if you ever go there or not but just a thought in case you travel to any of those areas often. They're plainly listed as Simulcast on the RR database.

 

[chad_96]

I'm absolutely sure everyone here is trying to help, I'd say 99% of us don't want you, or anyone else, to buy something they can't use in their area. I know nothing about the SDS programming but when I use Sentinel on my 536 and the 436 I sold, honestly I think that same stuff can do the SDS stuff so I guess they use the same stuff. Whatever you decide, good luck in your decision. IF you can understand the limitations of it and you're looking for something smaller than the HH scanners, look into the Unication pagers. Somewhat of a programming learning curve but, even traveling if you understand the limitations they're great. (and really small). Just another thing to help you "not decide" what to do LOL. EDIT: There are 5 simulcast sites in CO on DTRS, I don't know if you ever go there or not but just a thought in case you travel to any of those areas often. They're plainly listed as Simulcast on the RR database.

I agree. I have met some great people who have a wealth of knowledge and are more than happy to help.

The last scanner I had before this was a very long time ago. So, this has been a hell of an adventure of learning.

From my understanding the sds series does use the same programming through sentinel as the 536/436. Honestly, my sds100 works absolutely perfect (as long as i dont take it off the mounting clip i would assume, havent touched it) BUT .. in a mysterious way that has confused myself, and some others I talk with on Here. Just want to consider a different base unit with a better front end.

Looked at unication pagers... I will leave those for the more advanced folks. Confused me just saying the name first time I heard of them.

I did look through the colorado database to locate any and all that were labeled simulcast to get educated on it as well.

Thanks for the input and advice, I sure appreciate it!

 

[kb9klc]

Looked at unication pagers... I will leave those for the more advanced folks. Confused me just saying the name first time I heard of them.

Me too till I got my first one, and the fellow was kind enough to program some stuff in there for me, then I found out I had another friend that helped me get another "plug" and after trying to figure that out I was a little better. I'm only about 3 months in on them but there's a lot of help out there (right here at RR) and thus far it's been about like the first time I tried to program a Motorola DMR radio.... Good luck in your decision, let us know what you decide.

 

[RMason]

But I sure can hear the exact same radio transmissions from a user on either site, irregardless of the frequencies. This being the major reason I looked at the simulcast possibilities.

A talkgroup can be broadcast on multiple sites of a trunked system. It depends on what units are affiliated with each site. This is different from simulcast.

As far as the simulcast situation. That has been the major confusion. I have been reading on simulcast, and Colorado. It seems the Colorado DTRS system only operates "In a similar way" as simulcast. But, is not actually a simulcast system completely, unless noted as simulcast.This of course I just read minutes ago as I started looking further Into it all.

Anyways, done my research after and found that the State of Colorado DTRS system simply "works similar" to the way simulcast operates, along with some minor explanation. Makes perfect sense..

Can you give a pointer to where you are reading that " It seems the Colorado DTRS system only operates "In a similar way" as simulcast"? Maybe we can help to clarify the confusion.

 

[kb9klc]

A talkgroup can be broadcast on multiple sites of a trunked system. It depends on what units are affiliated with each site. This is different from simulcast

I think this is where some confusion came into play from several posts.

 

[chad_96]

A talkgroup can be broadcast on multiple sites of a trunked system. It depends on what units are affiliated with each site. This is different from simulcast.





Can you give a pointer to where you are reading that " It seems the Colorado DTRS system only operates "In a similar way" as simulcast"? Maybe we can help to clarify the confusion.

I have been looking to see which site I read that on. It was a very short, non descriptive explanation. It basically said, No, Colorado's DTRS system is not a Simulcast system. It works in a similar way that a simulcast area would work due to its zones that can broadcast the same radio transmissions at the same time to extend radio coverage over a set zone or area.

The closest I can find to that is the results of the search I did on it to find that link originally on Google. Maybe you can shed some light on if any of it makes sense or is even true?

It reads ..

Yes, Colorado's statewide digital trunking radio system, often referred to as "ARMER" (Advanced Radio Matrix for Emergency Response), is considered a simulcast system, meaning multiple transmitters broadcast the same signal on the same frequency simultaneously to extend coverage across a large area.

• 
  
  

• 
  
  
• 
  
  
  
• 
  
  
• 
  
  

• 
  

Key points about Colorado's system:

• Technology: The system primarily uses Motorola P25 digital trunking technology.
  

• 
  
  

• 
  
  
• 
  
  
  
• 
  
  
• 
  
  
  
• • 
    
• Simulcast Zones: The state is divided into multiple simulcast zones, where several transmitters broadcast the same signal simultaneously to ensure consistent coverage.
  

• 
  
  

• 
  
  
• 
  
  
  
• 
  
  
• 
  
  
  
• • 
    
• Purpose: This design helps to improve radio communication reliability for emergency responders throughout the state, especially in areas with challenging terrain.
  
  

 

[chad_96]

Yes. This is a prime example.

 

[chad_96]

I think this is where some confusion came into play from several posts.

Posted my response to this on a separate posting. But, yes. This a prime example.

 

[chad_96]

Simulcast Zones: The state is divided into multiple simulcast zones, where several transmitters broadcast the same signal simultaneously to ensure consistent coverage.

I would point out this quote is what I was specifically pin pointing as to the closest I got when I originally found and read what I did on it "working on a similar way" referring to the zones and areas.

 

[RMason]

Yes, Colorado's statewide digital trunking radio system, often referred to as "ARMER" (Advanced Radio Matrix for Emergency Response), is considered a simulcast system, meaning multiple transmitters broadcast the same signal on the same frequency simultaneously to extend coverage across a large area.

Colorado's DTRS system is not referred to as ARMER. It sounds like this is referring to the Minnesota system. I think an AI response got confused.
From: Allied-Radio-Matrix-for-Emergency-Radio-

ARMER is the Minnesota state wide emergency radio system. The acronym stands for Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Radio. ARMER is a fully digital, trunked radio system used for mobile, two-way communication between the command center and officers, fire fighters and other emergency personnel. The ARMER system was first introduced in the Twin Cities metropolitan area.​

​

• Simulcast Zones: The state is divided into multiple simulcast zones, where several transmitters broadcast the same signal simultaneously to ensure consistent coverage.

CO DTRS - the state is not divided into multiple simulcast zones.

 

[chad_96]

Colorado's DTRS system is not referred to as ARMER. It sounds like this is referring to the Minnesota system. I think an AI response got confused.
From: Allied-Radio-Matrix-for-Emergency-Radio-

ARMER is the Minnesota state wide emergency radio system. The acronym stands for Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Radio. ARMER is a fully digital, trunked radio system used for mobile, two-way communication between the command center and officers, fire fighters and other emergency personnel. The ARMER system was first introduced in the Twin Cities metropolitan area.​

Yeah, I was disregarding that armer portion as well as the yes colorado DTRS is a Simulcast system as i knew that all to be incorrect from what i had read earlier. I was trying to copy and paste the lower section on the Key points, as that portion was more in line with what i had read, Specifically pointing out the "Simulcast zones" section.

That portion of Simulcast zones seems to be more true of how my area sites work, even if it's a smaller zone. They broadcast the same on both sites I monitor is why I say that.

 

[RMason]

That portion of Simulcast zones seems to be more true of how my area sites work, even if it's a smaller zone. They broadcast the same on both sites I monitor is why I say that.

You keep circling back to this, and reaching an incorrect conclusion. The fact that the same transmissions are broadcast on multiple sites is not a valid indicator of simulcast.

Here are some definitions for you:

Simulcast: One channel at each of the simulcasting sites transmits the same signal simultaneously at the same frequency​

Multicast: One channel at each of the participating sites transmits the same signal simultaneously at different frequency​

Yes - You are receiving the same traffic on multiple sites. These sites do not share the same frequencies. Simulcast is not a factor. As I stated earlier, a talkgroup can be broadcast on multiple sites of a trunked system. It depends on what units are affiliated with each site. This is different from simulcast.

 

[RMason]

To circle back to your original question - I believe either the bcd536hp or bcd996p2 would make good replacements if you decide to part with the sds200. I have used both of these on the CO DTRS in northern Colorado with no issues.

 

[chad_96]

You keep circling back to this, and reaching an incorrect conclusion. The fact that the same transmissions are broadcast on multiple sites is not a valid indicator of simulcast.

Here are some definitions for you:

Simulcast: One channel at each of the simulcasting sites transmits the same signal simultaneously at the same frequency​

Multicast: One channel at each of the participating sites transmits the same signal simultaneously at different frequency​

Yes - You are receiving the same traffic on multiple sites. These sites do not share the same frequencies. Simulcast is not a factor. As I stated earlier, a talkgroup can be broadcast on multiple sites of a trunked system. It depends on what units are affiliated with each site. This is different from simulcast.

Simply No..

This thread had zero to do with simulcast, other than the mention in the beginning threads that the SDS series was designed for simulcast.

The simulcast talk was brought on by others. One in particular who claimed they are/were monitoring the State of Colorado DTRS system, and it is ALL simulcast.

Having had conversation about possibly being in a simulcast area before I Simply was told NO. This was from another RR member I was conversing with, who brought up the possibility, and then stated to disregard, I was not and not to bother worrying about simulcast.

Therefore, I have done just that, not worried about simulcast or anything to do with it.

WHICH BRINGS US TO TONIGHT....

I WAS TOLD ALL OF COLORADO DTRS STATEWIDE SYSTEM WAS SIMULCAST by someone who is/was monitoring it. Post # whatever in this thread.

This confused the hell out of me, leading me to do a quick search on what I could find about it. Again I looked at a site that had VERY LITTLE in detail. It Simply stated, the colorado DTRS statewide system worked in a similar fashion.

AGAIN, it said NO the state of colorado dtrs was NOT an ALL simulcast system and mentioned nothing more.

I WAS NOT circling around to nothing. I simply stated that that ONE SECTION labeled "SIMULCAST ZONES" seemed very similar to my area and listening situation. NOT THAT IT WAS THAT SITUATION.

I started this thread about ditching the sds200 that has the worst front end known to mankind for a 536HP or 996p2. To get away from a scanner designed around simulcast and with a horrible front end. That's it.

I have again verified I am NOT in a simulcast area, and honestly could give a rats behind about simulcast. BUT, I'm no arm chair expert like many, so I want to ensure I'm not missing something in the long run. Period.

So, where all this simulcast B.S. started was from another member saying that ALL of colorados system was simulcast causing absolute confusion and causing me to figure out what was correct...