I recall seeing numerous concerns about conventional analog reception going down after the latest FW revision. Was this just cockpit error, or is it real? There are still so many agencies still using good old analog...
Like I said, can't believe everything you read on the Interwebs! Some people only seem to READ and SEE the negatives.My 536 sensitivity on Air and VHF (the most widely used here) is excellent compared with my older BCT15. Lots less noise on the distant systems using the 536, and aircraft are much more intelligible monitoring the very weak ground control channel at the local airport. I see no issues with sensitivity.
It's not a "bug report". It's a question. Isn't this where PROSPECTIVE Uniden owners are supposed to ask questions if they are CONSIDERING purchasing a Uniden scanner?LIScanner101 was this on your 536 or 436? Not sure this is the correct place to put "Bug Reports"?
Forgot about the PRO-18 that you just bought for about $80 from Overstock!It's not a "bug report". It's a question. Isn't this where PROSPECTIVE Uniden owners are supposed to ask questions if they are CONSIDERING purchasing a Uniden scanner?
You people are EXTREMELY defensive about this.
Anyway, I now have a RS Pro-18 I just started using for local digital comms, and I'm using my UNIDEN BCT15X for everything else.
:evil:You people ...
It happens a lot here. Same as when someone asks UPMan an uncomfortable question and his minions come rushing to his rescue.Why is JamesO speaking for LIScanner 101?
How about UHF?My 536 sensitivity on Air and VHF (the most widely used here) is excellent compared with my older BCT15. Lots less noise on the distant systems using the 536, and aircraft are much more intelligible monitoring the very weak ground control channel at the local airport. I see no issues with sensitivity.
I thought the 536HP had terrible aircraft receive mumbly,fuzzy reception,at least the one I had did,the VHF was great 150MHZ-onthe UHF was acceptable.I have a PSr-800 and I feel it works better in every way,scans faster,clearer and easier to program for me at least.My 536 sensitivity on Air and VHF (the most widely used here) is excellent compared with my older BCT15. Lots less noise on the distant systems using the 536, and aircraft are much more intelligible monitoring the very weak ground control channel at the local airport. I see no issues with sensitivity.
LOL!!!:evil::evil:
Thanks. Seems there are still some people on here that don't scream heresy and get their panties in a bunch when questions are asked about these scanners.I thought the 536HP had terrible aircraft receive mumbly,fuzzy reception,at least the one I had did,the VHF wasd great 150MHZ-onthe UHF was acceptable.I have a PSr-800 and I feel it works better in every way,scans faster,clearer and easier to program for me at least.
Just tired of all the Uniden bashing you were doing about the x36HP and you did not even have one.JamesO,
Who said I bought it on overstock? And please, enough with the condescending tone, I don't need your affirmation as to whether or not I'm "moving in the correct direction".
Anyway, I bought it exactly BECAUSE of everything I read about it. I read VERY little negative press about it and overall very POSITIVE things about it. Also, I didn't want to wait any longer for what GRE is planning to release, and the new Unidens have a TON of negative press. And guess what? It's a great little scanner! I LOVE it.
Who deliberately dismisses negative reports about consumable goods?