Can Someone Give Me A Bottom Line Answer

Status
Not open for further replies.

sparklehorse

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 15, 2003
Messages
1,207
Location
Portland, Oregon
I'm not familiar with your area at all, but after poking around the database a bit I highly suspect your Unified Fire units are operating on this system:

Utah Communications Authority Trunking System, Various, Multi-State - Scanner Frequencies

Scroll down to Salt Lake County Fire/EMS and you'll see a bunch of Tac channels for them. My guess would be their comms when responding to the call by your house were carried out on one of those Tac channels, or possibly one of the other channels in those listings for Salt Lake County Fire/EMS. If that is where they operate then I think that explains why you heard nothing on the Fire frequencies you downloaded from Sentinel, because what you downloaded were likely the VHF and/or UHF conventional frequencies listed in the database. It's likely those conventional frequencies are not in use any longer. To receive your fire units you would need to have most likely the Salt Lake Simulcast site enabled in your radio, and perhaps one or two other sites for your area. And of course be scanning the relevant talk groups. The P25 system for Unified (or was it United?) that someone linked to looks like a new system that is not online yet, but they may switch over to it at some point in the future. I would get it programmed in your radio and scan it in ID Search mode so you can keep an eye on what's happening with it.

.
 

enosjones

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
1,893
Location
Price, Utah
The data channels for UFA ARE online for P25 in both counties


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,331
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
Step by step instructions to add a p25 system to Sentinel - HP1 or HP2

1. Click on the favorites list editor.

2. Click New Favorites List.

3. Enter the new system name.

4. Create a new system using the green plus sign button.

5. Name the system.

6. Select p25 standard for system type, click OK.

7. Click on the system you just created at left. It will show tabs for departments, sites, unit id, options. Since you don't know any departments yet, click on sites.

8. Using the green plus sign, enter a new site... name it or leave it site 0001

9. Click on the name of the new site you just created at left. You will get tabs for FREQUENCIES, options, band plan, location.

10. using the green plus sign add all of the known frequencies for the site. Each click of the green plus sign adds another frequency record.

11. When all the frequencies are in, go back to the system name on left, click on the options tab, set ID search to ON.

12. Upload the favorites list to the radio and select it (or do so in the profile you are using)

This is all that is needed to create a p25 system without any talkgroups. Once you know enough to add departments and talkgroups you can add these later.

Scanning a system with search ON will play any talkgroup that becomes active on the system, whether programmed or not.

These are the basic steps to add any new trunked system to the HP1 using Sentinel.

That being said, I understand that the system of interest is in Sentinel but misnamed. By going to the database, finding United Fire, right clicking on it, and appending it to a favorites list, it will do all the steps listed above. It will add a department of ALL and one talkgroup of TEST which are the only things in the database yet. United = Unified according to the person who submitted to the database.

Mark
536/436/WS1095/HP1/HP2/996T/996XT/996P2/396XT/325P2/PSR800/15X/others
 
Last edited:

enosjones

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
1,893
Location
Price, Utah
Unified Fire Authority NOT United Fire Authority

I submitted Changes so when they get to it, it should be fixed to the correct information, I also Msgd theaton about the switch as well
 

enosjones

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
1,893
Location
Price, Utah

sparklehorse

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 15, 2003
Messages
1,207
Location
Portland, Oregon
I don't know I know the P25 isn't 100% active yet, but the P25 control channels are just*starting to come online, shouldn't be too long

And maybe it won't be long, but I know in our area the new P25 system was technically online with a burbling control channel for at least a year before users began migrating to it. I think it took that long for the radio techs to work out the bugs, test for coverage, prep the new user radios, etc, etc.

.
 

dcisive

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
176
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Thanks for the instruction post. I had already gone to Justin's site and followed his directions. Indeed those channels have NO activity as yet it seems, so not a big deal in the end. Much adue about nothing.
 

enosjones

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
1,893
Location
Price, Utah
IN either case the database is updated and fixed and accurate for now til it starts talkin.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,331
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
Thanks for the instruction post. I had already gone to Justin's site and followed his directions. Indeed those channels have NO activity as yet it seems, so not a big deal in the end. Much adue about nothing.
With only 1 talkgroup, labeled "test", that is what I figured. It is, however, something I would put in a favorites list in search mode.

Eventually, activity is going to start showing up.

Glad you figured out how to add frequencies to a system. This same procedure is used to add departments and talkgroups, which is a function you might need as this system comes on line, talkgroups become active, but are not in RR yet.

Mark
536/436/WS1095/HP1/HP2/996T/996XT/996P2/396XT/325P2/PSR800/15X/others
 

UPMan

In Memoriam
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
13,296
Location
Arlington, TX
As this system and all those frequencies (well, the repeater output frequencies...all those frequencies in the 81x.xxx are input frequencies you would not normally monitor) are in Sentinel, now, there is no reason to go through all those steps to enter it into a FL manually. In Sentinel, in the left pane navigate to:
USA --> Utah --> County Systems --> United Fire Authority
Right click on "United Fire Authority" and select "Append Favorites List."

I see that the RRDB now has been updated to reflect "Unified". Tomorrow morning Sentinel dB will be similarly updated.

You'll then want to turn on ID Search for the system to listen for traffic other than on the Test TG.
 

raisindot

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
247
I've had an HP-1 for years, but since a couple of new P25 phase 2 systems are going online in my region I decided to try out a 436HP.

As much as I love the ease of use and the screen of the HP-1, the 436HP is much more sensitive and picks up many more signals than the HP-1 using identical antenna and database setups side by side on batteries. I find myself using my HP-1 much less these days.
 

dcisive

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
176
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Now THERE is some good input. Good to KNOW the 436 is capable of better sensitivity then the HP1. I was not thinking that after reading so much about the dang battery door sensitivity loss issues needing that gerry rigged copper tape treatment to restore it. Sounded not a great idea
 

SOFA_KING

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
1,581
Location
SE Florida
Now THERE is some good input. Good to KNOW the 436 is capable of better sensitivity then the HP1. I was not thinking that after reading so much about the dang battery door sensitivity loss issues needing that gerry rigged copper tape treatment to restore it. Sounded not a great idea

Good...only if you use an external antenna mounted away from the radio. I have both, and it is NOT that much more sensitive. Only if you manual tune P25 to the best setting for the system in use does it get a bit better. Are you up for that?

You got plenty of "good advice" here and elsewhere, but you only appear to hear what you want to hear.

Good luck with that!

P
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,331
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
Good...only if you use an external antenna mounted away from the radio. I have both, and it is NOT that much more sensitive. Only if you manual tune P25 to the best setting for the system in use does it get a bit better. Are you up for that?

You got plenty of "good advice" here and elsewhere, but you only appear to hear what you want to hear.

Good luck with that!

P
This is one of the problems with being in "buy" mode. You tend to pick out the things that support your conclusion to purchase.

This is fine. If you are ready to buy, then go ahead. I doubt you will be disappointed.

However, owning both an HP1 and 436/536, and reviewing RRDB for your area, and understanding that you will basically have fairly strong reception for anything in the county (and some adjoining counties) you will probably not get anything more on the x36 radio than the HP1.

But the x36 radios are good radios. They just cannot touch the quality, clarity and readability of the HP1 or HP2 screens.

Mark
536/436/WS1095/HP1/HP2/996T/996XT/996P2/396XT/325P2/PSR800/15X/others
 

SOFA_KING

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
1,581
Location
SE Florida
This is one of the problems with being in "buy" mode. You tend to pick out the things that support your conclusion to purchase.

This is fine. If you are ready to buy, then go ahead. I doubt you will be disappointed.

However, owning both an HP1 and 436/536, and reviewing RRDB for your area, and understanding that you will basically have fairly strong reception for anything in the county (and some adjoining counties) you will probably not get anything more on the x36 radio than the HP1.

But the x36 radios are good radios. They just cannot touch the quality, clarity and readability of the HP1 or HP2 screens.

Mark
536/436/WS1095/HP1/HP2/996T/996XT/996P2/396XT/325P2/PSR800/15X/others

It's that he ignores the many justified complaints of EMI issues by selectively listening to one person who says "there is no problem with the 436". That tells me he only wants to hear what he wants to hear. Whatever!

I rarely want to give any advice to posts like this because of stuff like that. I own and use most all of these scanners, and I test them under all the various conditions, so I have seen what works and what doesn't. Not that I'm the only one...hardly. But since I already made the investment in them, I use them all in whatever capacity that will offer usable service. The first time I took my 436 in the field, and scanned all the VHF, UHF and 900 ham repeaters around my area, I immediately knew something was wrong, as the repeaters I'm well acquainted with were much noisier than they should have been with the same ham antennas I use on other equipment. Yet, I hooked it to a car antenna, or outside home antenna, and it picked up some very distant stations that surprised me (just as good as the 536). So now I use the 436 mostly in the car, as I really don't receive much on it (other than big signal trunked traffic) out in a portable situation. So the reports of reduced portable reception are substantiated. I was just trying to help pass along that experience, and some other alternatives that did work well.

The 996P2 is a great (and flexible) solution with better sound quality than the HP or 436 radios. More economical for non-advanced users, as well. It's a perfect solution for what he said he wanted to do, and has expandable options if he wants to venture into other modes. Soon I hope to have a 325P2 to use and test, so I can't say anything about that one for now...if a portable radio has to be his solution. I suspect it will equal the 996P2, but can't confirm that yet. I have a solution for the short battery life that I think will work (without external battery packs). More on that after I actually get one. They sure do sound good on all the YT videos I watched. I'd like to know how they compare to the 996P2, if anyone who owns both cares to comment.

The OP can do whatever he wants. It doesn't really matter to me. I was just trying to help.

Phil
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,331
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
I also like the 996 p2 for certain conditions. The OP, however, has experience with a database radio (HP1) and appears to be considering other database radios. The 396/996 radios, including the P2, have some serious drawbacks to someone looking at database radios. They also contain some drawbacks concerning system size and some other issues that might not make the 996 p2 the best choice.

I also recognize the problems with the 436 in the VHF range, but about all scanners have some drawback, and there isn't one that's perfect.

If I look over the current crop of scanners out there, I consider the 996p2, 436, 536 and HP2 to be the ones I would recommend, knowing each has its own issues.

But you could do a lot worse than a 436 when picking something right now.

Mark
536/436/WS1095/HP1/HP2/996T/996XT/996P2/396XT/325P2/PSR800/15X/others
 

dcisive

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
176
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
SOFA_KING I think you've got me wrong. I've been at this for a lot of years. Back in the 80's I was very seriously into scanning and shortwave with top gear (GRE/RS and Japan Radio). I got out of in in the early 90's as I began to travel for a living. I picked up a wonderful small IC-R2 Icom scanner which I always marveled at. It was fast, accurate with superb sensitivity and audio. I didn't ignore nor dis your initial comment on the scanner as all I did say was thanked the one commenter on his statement of the 436 being more sensitive than the HP1. It sounded encouraging. But indeed I'd been following the said debacle regarding the sensitivity loss from the poor battery compartment design and signal leakage. That has turned me off of the 436 a fair amount, as a number of folks private messaged me to encourage me to take a pass on it and get the 536 instead. I'm not really hung up on a portable really. I spend perhaps as much as 98% of my time when I listen to the HP1 in my office at my desk.

I have a old VHF/UHF powered antenna I got back in the 80's from RadioShack. Ironically it works superbly in the HP1 and picks up stuff thus far up to around 80 miles away clearly, which has surprised me. I admit freely I do indeed love that screen on the HP1. It is very intuitive to use. I suppose I can live without DMR and the more advanced digital stuff. Virtually ALL of the other frequencies in my are are still Analog. The trunking, now that I have it properly programmed, on the HP1 seems to work very faithfully. So I suppose IF (and now it's a big if) I decide to do the new scanner, it makes the most sense to consider a 536. There are aspects of it I like and of course I do want the "Flagship" at this point.

Once again the workings of the TRX-2 scared me a bit. It doesn't seem quite as intuitive, and with my familiarity of the software for Uniden not as easy for programming in general. I appreciate all the input of all of you, so please don't think I've dismissed it. It has put me on the back burner at the moment to re think what I'll do.
 

SOFA_KING

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
1,581
Location
SE Florida
All very good points, Mark and dcisive. I see where you are coming from. Nope...no perfect scanner for all situations. Possible? Definately! It's just not available...yet. I think we all love what a good scanner can do. A good scanner with a good antenna will hear tons of interesting activity. And today's scanners are lightyears ahead of anything we had before. There is so much out there to discover, and these things cover it. So many frequencies, so little time. :D

Indeed, the 536 is the top of the line. When manually tuned, it hears the weakest P25 signal of them all. And it's multi-mode capabilities are much better than Whistler's, although I await NXDN, as well as Fusion and D-STAR. Hopefully one day we will have the complete mode selection. No word on any development there. True, some have the database...if you really need it. I only toy with it in areas outside my home county and surrounding counties. If you travel, and want to hear some "noise", hook up the GPS and let it do it's thing. In real experience, I miss a lot of the action because too many irrelevant frequencies are scanned (even with many services turned off), and the default 2 second scan delay doesn't hold long enough to catch replies. Nothing like hearing the fire tones go out and missing the actual dispatch because the scanner didn't wait long enough for the dispatcher to key the mic and announce the callout. So, in practicality, the database is not always getting the job done. It's better to make your own custom scan lists and assign them to Quick Keys, and even your own GPS rectangles to better control how it performs on borders. It still requires manual work to do all that, but when it's done right, it's a killer operation.

The major trade off I see is scan speed versus database and GPS rectangle border control. My 996P2 scans twice the speed of my 536 or 436. It sounds a little better (less mud and less hiss). So if the database is not really needed, it's a better choice. But you are exactly right about the Whistler being less intuitive. I always felt that way about them since the first PSR-800 EZscan format came out. And they are all the same from that point forward. Just the awkward way you have to operate and program them discourages me from wanting to do much with them. I pretty much dedicate mine to search scanning. It just keeps checking my bands of interest and collects data. Does a great job of that, and the Uniden scanners can't do the same (no data on encrypted P25 transmissions). So both have a place in my grand scheme of all scanner things. I even use my old HP-1 for searching and extreme update features. It has a place. And I totally agree on the color touch screen interface being among the best interface of any. Wouldn't it be cool if we had one scanner that had all the best features of each one of these scanners?...including that color touch screen?

Anyway, I'm sure you will find one that suits your needs, d. You have all the "informed" points of view you could ever want...and maybe more. ;)

Phil
 

AA6IO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
1,511
Location
Cerritos, CA (LA County)
There are so many great radios out there now, that asking for a bottom line answer is really impossible.
I own a lot of different scanners dating back to the BC100XLT. Had some crystal scanners that gave away long ago (should have kept them). The radios I currently use are the 536HP, 436HP, TRX-2, TRX-1, BCD996P2, BCD325P2 (which by the way, is a nice radio very similar to the 996P2 in function), HP-1, HP-2, WS-1080, BC125AT, AR8200 MKIII, IC-20, IC-R6, AR-DV1, and lots of earlier stuff like the PSR-600, 996XT, 396XT, and on and on. Drives my wife, daughter, grandkids, etc crazy who think I'm nuts. Also lots of SDRs (no need to enumerate here).
Like Sofa King, I use every one of these radios dating back to the last 10 years or so. Earlier ones get let use. We have a lot of P2, DMR, and NXDN here in Los Angeles, so the newer Unidens and Whistlers are what I use most. Every one of them is a major advancement from scanners just 10-15 years ago.
If I want to search, hard to beat the 536HP and 436HP. And my 436HP is the go to radio when I travel for its database features and ability to hold on systems, departments, and channels/TGs in any new location when use the GPS or zip code. The 536HP is probably the most sensitive radio I have for P25. The 436HP is excellent for 800 Mhz, better than other handhelds.
The 996P2 scans faster and has better audio. The 325P2, which has kind of replaced my 396XT in my arsenal, is a great portable unit that is much easier to walk around with. The ultimate walk around unit is the IC-R6. Works great on air and marine.
The TRX-1 and TRX-2, although very short on search features, have the best P25 and DMR sound quality. And the NXDN I monitor on both sounds beautiful. If I just want to go with sound quality and listen, tend to go to GREs and Whislters. If I want to use ProScan (great program), then many of my Unidens fit the bill. And of course, who can beat the display of the HP-1 and HP-2
So what's the point? Everyone of these scanners and radios have great and not so great features. Once in while, I even take out the older PRO-43, which is great on civil and mil air. Or the BC780XLT, which is great on marine and air. I run this with Pro-Scan.
If it sounds like I scan 24 hrs a day, quite the opposite. I maybe listen a couple of hours a day at home, and more often in the car or when out walking. I also do a lot of logging for new stuff using the 536HP with Butel program (a real shortcoming of the new Whistlers with no third party options).
I never travel without at least the IC-20 and the 436HP.
So, for me, there is no near-bottom line answer. What can I say, I like to collect scanners. I actually have had many ham radios over the years, but have donated many. Those I don't tend to keep those.
Been in amateur radio since 1962, Extra since 1980, age now 68. But I find the variety of stations on scanners far more interesting than sitting around chatting on the radio. I prefer chatting in person. Do a lot of VE exams in local area.
Forgot the question. Oh yea, the bottom line answer. The bottom line answer is that I just laugh when I see different threads about "what is the best radio." Really each to his/her own, and I'm just glad we have such a variety to select from, or try them all out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top