Conventional scanning performance of x36HP's

[lamarrsy]

Hi,

I've owned a BCD396T since almost day-one, I later changed for a BCD396XT that I still have, and bought a BCD436HP 2 weeks ago.... That I returned last week.
80% of my listening is on analog freqs and this radio is deaf as it can be, on analog freqs.
I've owned a ton of ham radio HTs and several Radio-Shack / GRE / Uniden scanners and never found one as deaf as this BCD436HP.
I will enquire at the dealer if they tested the unit when I returned it because it was so bad I can't imagine it is its normal condition.
Just to let you know, signals that were 3 bars on the 396XT were 1 bar on the 436; signals with 1 bar on the 396XT we're not receivable on the 436...
73's
-Sylvain.

 

[LIScanner101]

I rarely if ever listen to aviation so that wouldn't bother me.

 

[whsbuss]

Hi,

I've owned a BCD396T since almost day-one, I later changed for a BCD396XT that I still have, and bought a BCD436HP 2 weeks ago.... That I returned last week.
80% of my listening is on analog freqs and this radio is deaf as it can be, on analog freqs.
I've owned a ton of ham radio HTs and several Radio-Shack / GRE / Uniden scanners and never found one as deaf as this BCD436HP.
I will enquire at the dealer if they tested the unit when I returned it because it was so bad I can't imagine it is its normal condition.
Just to let you know, signals that were 3 bars on the 396XT were 1 bar on the 436; signals with 1 bar on the 396XT we're not receivable on the 436...
73's
-Sylvain.

Its possible that 436 was defective. Just saying

 

[phask]

Ok - if someone wants to test this, it needs to be someone that has ARC to make it easier.

Create a FL with 1000 freqs at random. I believe ARC has a "fill" feature or just load all of the Nationwide and ARC's search systems. Add the local weather freq.

Duplicate it as another FL then use ARC to sort.

Crank squelch up HIGH to stop any stopping on noise.

If possible adjust squelch so you can hear WX and nothing else. You need a way to have a signal to know when it's cycled all the way thru, yet not stop on any activity.

It would be better using an antenna that lets you receive WX but little else.


Run thru and avoid anything it stops on to eliminate birdies.

Now start scanning, it will stop on wx, have your stopwatch ready and press whatever button causes it to restart. Again I have a HP1 -it is probably different with the xseries.
Stop the stopwatch when it hits the WX.

Do it 10 times or so - times shuld be similar.

Now repeat with a sorted FL.

Then do it with FL's broken down by dept.


All this talk of it's slower means nothing without data. t could be pausing briefly on noise, weak signal, birdie.

- I'll be waiting for reports -

 

[SCPD]

Upman has stated (and I'm too lazy to find it) that order hasno bearing on scan speed on the newer Uniden's, including the HP1.

Know what I'm unsure of does the amount of Departments has any bearing.

I stil use the HP1 and just looking at it, it goes through my conventional in under a second - not sure how many but there is at least a dozen departments and maybe 100 total freqs.

I can't imagine that it would have any effect on a trunked system. Trunked systems (Motorola, P25, and EDACS) aren't "scanned" in the conventional sense. The scanner just sits on a single frequency (the control channel) until a channel grant matches one of the channels you've stored (in ID Scan mode). There is nothing you can do in your programming that is going to get the system to send the channel grant any faster.

I Do believe upMan was referring to channel grants in TRUNKED SYSTEMS only in his comment unless you can show me somewhere that says scan order don't effect conventional...
we are not talking about trunk systems here phask

 

[SCPD]

"Slowness" is a relative term. Slowness as compared to what? I like scanning "everything" and don't want to miss "anything" . Those reporting "slowness" notice a change, but I realize this could be a subjective observation.

slowness as in an old radioshack pro-62 outscanning 2 hp1s and a 536 with the same 36 channels programmed in all


I have missed 5 second fire dispatch calls on both hp1's and 536 with no delay set and only 36 channels just catch the end bleep of what dispatch says when the pro-62 picks it up loud and clear so don't tell me scan order don't make a difference... try it for yourself on conventional and see for yourself then come on here and let me know... maybe I have a unit that's defective if I use the database that's built in but not when I do a favorites list with the same 36 channel programmed in descending order from hi to low frequency..

I do love my UNIDENS just a software update to sentinel to scan by frequency for conventional systms would help the rate at which these scanners scan...

 

[kruser]

I need to test this. I have a pretty large amount of conventional analog Favs with departments and all. I can't say I've noticed any slowness when it goes through those favorites.
But... after reading hydro12943's post's, I do wonder if changing things will improve scanning speed.

Well, I've taken my conventional favorites and re-ordered the frequency lists with highest and lowest first, removed departments and grouped everything under the first avaliable quick key that allowed me to turn a list on/off. I essentially eliminated everything unneeded plus sorted my lists by frequency in both ascending and descending order.

I cannot say that any of these tests increased my scan speed (or decreased it) of my favorite lists that I tested this on. Some had a couple hundred conventional analog channel or frequencies but they scan through the lists just as fast regardless if they are sorted by name or further grouped by departments with random frequency orders.

I'm not sure why the OP saw such an increase in delay speed to scan through a favorite but I cannot duplicate this at all.

And yes, I did wipe my Fav's from the radio before uploading my newly sorted or unsorted (things just thrown in at random and in no order at all) lists.

 

[phask]

Conventioal system scan speed test using HP1 .

I created a 1000 line item list using Arc in the UHF range. I then duplicated the FL by adding a description field of A-Z and sorted by description.

Scan speeds in either freq order (lowest first, highest first) or random were same.

No idea if adding VHF or VHF lo would change or not.

As I said before - sort order of frequencies has no bearing on scan speed. If it does - prove it and submit a file.

 

[SCPD]

Conventioal system scan speed test using HP1 .

I created a 1000 line item list using Arc in the UHF range. I then duplicated the FL by adding a description field of A-Z and sorted by description.

Scan speeds in either freq order (lowest first, highest first) or random were same.

No idea if adding VHF or VHF lo would change or not.

As I said before - sort order of frequencies has no bearing on scan speed. If it does - prove it and submit a file.

I have since reset /cleared data favorites and all and now its fine...scans the same either way... made new favorites list by correct system naming and department/channel and did a firmware upgrade to the 1 that's out now. Scans beautifully...
sorry for the confusion all

 

[DaveIN]

I've noted improvement in the reception on the x36 models compaired to the x96 models. But with the inprovement in reception I also notice more interference, and some intermodulation, from a nearby NOAA transmitter. If you live in a metro area it could be a problem with some channels. I'm waiting for a band opening so I can see how well the x36 series works on DX trunked systems. UHF channels are already +90 miles when the MUF is up, specifically in the 400 MHz range.

A quick check with the 996XT produced 2 NOAA weather channels, the 536 is hearing 3, with 2 frequencies mixing with at least two DX NOAA stations.

 

[SCPD]

I have since reset /cleared data favorites and all and now its fine...scans the same either way... made new favorites list by correct system naming and department/channel and did a firmware upgrade to the 1 that's out now. Scans beautifully...
sorry for the confusion all

slow scan issue is back with no changes made at all this time

 

[LIScanner101]

Seems there is a mix of perception as well as actual hard data on 1) scan speed and 2) conventional frequency sensitivity. The latter has been mentioned several times as an unexpected side effect of flashing the latest firmware.

Any update on the sensitivity issue apparently linked to the latest firmware?

 

[lamarrsy]

Hi,
Just a tad of precision for point #2: It is present on an non-firmware-updated BCD436HP, in my case (and at least one other user).

-Sylvain.


Envoyé de mon iPad à l'aide de Tapatalk

 

[LIScanner101]

Hi,
Just a tad of precision for point #2: It is present on an non-firmware-updated BCD436HP, in my case (and at least one other user).

-Sylvain.


Envoyé de mon iPad à l'aide de Tapatalk

Did you return the scanner?

 

[lamarrsy]

Hi,
Yes I did return it. I am waiting for a new batch of 436's to receive another one, as I am willing to give a second try.
Oh and : I asked the dealer if they could do a side by side test with another unit and also with a BCD396XT but I haven't heard from them about this.



Envoyé de mon iPad à l'aide de Tapatalk

 

[SCPD]

"Slowness" is a relative term. Slowness as compared to what? I like scanning "everything" and don't want to miss "anything" . Those reporting "slowness" notice a change, but I realize this could be a subjective observation.

SO WHAT IS IT ?

 

[SCPD]

What with 99.99% of the focus on the performance of these scanners being on digital trunking systems, I was wondering if anyone has any report for their conventional analog scanning abilities? Where I live there is a ton of FD and some PD still on analog frequencies but there are some trunked systems, with only one of them 100% digital (the other one is I would guess 90% analog). Are the x36HP's doing OK on analog?

How can one in a different area tell YOU HOW IT WILL PERFORM???????????????????

 

[lamarrsy]

... In scanning ANALOG FREQS AND COMPARING WITH A KNOWN REFERENCE, that is !!!!


(Why the need to scream?)

 

[LIScanner101]

Who's screaming ?? ??

 

[lamarrsy]

No sorry,
Don't pay attention... Writing in CAPS letters is normally interpreted as screaming... I was surprised to see the previous poster's answer, and even more with a part in all caps letters.
We're here to helps us between us, and on the topics of scanning slowness and lack of sensitivity of the radio, a group like here should be helpful in helping troubleshoot, that's all.