Anyone reading this message know who I can contact about the programming reference Wake County, NC for the GRE scanners? I am currently located there and the program on line does not work. I think there is a problem with the way it is configured on line in the program.
Gre programming
- Thread starter leonzo
- Start date
- Status
mikey60
Member
What model of scanner are you trying to program?
Mike
Mike
I have a GRE PSR 800
ka3jjz
Wiki Admin Emeritus
'What is 'The program online does not work'? Be more specific - what error message(s) are you seeing? What system(s) are you trying to program?
If you think EZScan has failed, you can download a copy of that program here
GRE America Inc.
Mike
If you think EZScan has failed, you can download a copy of that program here
GRE America Inc.
Mike
Uninstall the program and reboot the computer. Download a fresh install from the address given above and install it. I have had this happen. The reboot is important to clear out any corrupt files before you try a reinstall. Reinstall all necessary updates to the EZScan. The scanner updates should not be affected if you previously installed them.
Okay will try that. My issue wasn't any error messages. It was when it loads the Wake County digital trunk system, it does not receive the system. When the same system was downloaded into my Uniden scanner from their site it received the system just fine. My thought was the Wake County, NC system loaded into the E-Z scan program is programmed incorrectly in the EZ Scan program.
ka3jjz
Wiki Admin Emeritus
GRE radios don't use DMA programming like the Unidens do; they have their own system based on object oriented technology. The Easier to Read manual may help here...
Easier to Read Pro-668/PSR800 Digital Scanner and EZ-Scan/iScan Software Manual
and we have a bit in our FAQ that might also help...
GRE/RS PC Object Oriented FAQ - The RadioReference Wiki
Mike
Easier to Read Pro-668/PSR800 Digital Scanner and EZ-Scan/iScan Software Manual
and we have a bit in our FAQ that might also help...
GRE/RS PC Object Oriented FAQ - The RadioReference Wiki
Mike
I think my problem here is I am not explaining myself clearly. I am not having a problem loading and or using the EZ scan program. I may be in the wrong "forum" room. My problem is what loads just reference WAKE County, NC does not work for the trunked system. Everything else I have loaded through EZ scan appears to work, but Wake County, NC trunked system does not work. So does anyone else reading this receive Wake County, NC on their GRE scanner? Should I pose this question somewhere else, like the NC forum page?
troymail
Silent Key
Are you speaking of this system?
Wake County Simulcast Trunking System, Various, North Carolina - Scanner Frequencies
If not - stop reading here... otherwise:
====
Looks like bad data on RR is the "root" cause.....
The system has two sites which indicate 39 and 38 site frequencies (???) respectively and there is ALOT of the same frequencies listed on BOTH sites (including some control/alt control frequencies).
Aside from this not making much sense (to me anyway), to my knowledge (last I heard) the sites on these systems can only have 32 (or less) frequencies. It appears the site frequencies > 32 are being ignored in the EZ Scan library - thus the control channel frequencies are not even in the library data (except possibly 853.150 on the Wake Simulcast site.
Uniden appears to simply accepts all of them (in the BCDx36HP Sentinel anyway) but the EZ Scan software limits the frequencies to 32 frequencies per site.
My first thought as a work around was that EZ Scan has an import option where you can import only the control channel frequencies. However, it looks like the library import for EZ Scan also limits each site to 32 frequencies so that won't work (seems to support my belief on the 32 frequency site limits).
So -- here's what I would do (at least for now - until this what looks to me like "bad information" on RR is corrected by someone) - in EZ Scan, remove all of the imported frequencies and then add only the control channel frequencies (red and blue from the RRDB page) for each of the respective sites. Then, copy the configuration to your scanner....
I'm several hundred miles away so I can't confirm this but give it a try and let's see what happens....
If my belief that the RRDB data is bad, this 32 frequency limit is no longer correct, and/or there's something that makes having the same frequencies listed on two different sites of the same system correct, I'm certain someone will chime in and let me know...
EDIT: Looking at other things, it seems like I've looked at this system before. There are some talkgroups listed multiple times with different descriptions which again, doesn't make sense to me: 33072 (twice, same "purpose" but in 2 different groups) and 35680 (more or less the same talkgroup - just listed numerous times in different "groups" of talkgroups; I was under the impression that RR didn't allow this type of thing).
Wake County Simulcast Trunking System, Various, North Carolina - Scanner Frequencies
If not - stop reading here... otherwise:
====
Looks like bad data on RR is the "root" cause.....
The system has two sites which indicate 39 and 38 site frequencies (???) respectively and there is ALOT of the same frequencies listed on BOTH sites (including some control/alt control frequencies).
Aside from this not making much sense (to me anyway), to my knowledge (last I heard) the sites on these systems can only have 32 (or less) frequencies. It appears the site frequencies > 32 are being ignored in the EZ Scan library - thus the control channel frequencies are not even in the library data (except possibly 853.150 on the Wake Simulcast site.
Uniden appears to simply accepts all of them (in the BCDx36HP Sentinel anyway) but the EZ Scan software limits the frequencies to 32 frequencies per site.
My first thought as a work around was that EZ Scan has an import option where you can import only the control channel frequencies. However, it looks like the library import for EZ Scan also limits each site to 32 frequencies so that won't work (seems to support my belief on the 32 frequency site limits).
So -- here's what I would do (at least for now - until this what looks to me like "bad information" on RR is corrected by someone) - in EZ Scan, remove all of the imported frequencies and then add only the control channel frequencies (red and blue from the RRDB page) for each of the respective sites. Then, copy the configuration to your scanner....
I'm several hundred miles away so I can't confirm this but give it a try and let's see what happens....
If my belief that the RRDB data is bad, this 32 frequency limit is no longer correct, and/or there's something that makes having the same frequencies listed on two different sites of the same system correct, I'm certain someone will chime in and let me know...
EDIT: Looking at other things, it seems like I've looked at this system before. There are some talkgroups listed multiple times with different descriptions which again, doesn't make sense to me: 33072 (twice, same "purpose" but in 2 different groups) and 35680 (more or less the same talkgroup - just listed numerous times in different "groups" of talkgroups; I was under the impression that RR didn't allow this type of thing).
Last edited:
I have cleaned up the Wake County Radio System entry in the database to accurately reflect the 24 RF channels in use. Hopefully this should clear up and issues with future software downloads. Further discussion can be continued in the following thread:
http://forums.radioreference.com/north-carolina-radio-discussion-forum/348937-wake-county-system-rrdb.html
Marshall KE4ZNR
http://forums.radioreference.com/north-carolina-radio-discussion-forum/348937-wake-county-system-rrdb.html
Marshall KE4ZNR
Thank you "Troymail" and the Administrator, both of your responses is what I was looking for!
troymail
Silent Key
Happy to help... this one was kinda interesting (to include the fact that I came across this strange stuff about 6 months ago for a different reason).
I'm still puzzled by the frequency reuse on "multiple sites" - it just doesn't seem "normal" - at least, I've never seen that before.
Thanks to Marshall for (interactively, as it turns out) making the updates to the database.
- Status
