Hamilton County vs. PSR500

[GrumpyAeroGuy]

After many months of experimenting with many/all settings, trying them all with a multitude of antennae (and I do mean ALL), reading all info found, I have come to the following unfortunate conclusion:

For my location/curse/situation, the PSR500 is absolutely, unadulteratedly useless for monitoring Hamilton Counties P25 system.

This is not a knock against GRE. I read Unidens have challenges there as well. Although, I must admit, the Uniden would have a hard time UNDERPERFORMING against my GRE, understanding that teh bar is set pretty low.

I'm not complaining, necessarily. A lot of reading and educating here (after the fact, unfortunately) has shed much light on the situation, and the challenge of monitoring these types of digital systems.

If I were to get 25% of any HC transmission to actually come thru, it would be a miracle--- and I would probably check the scanner to see what broke making it actually work.

All this thing is now is a 100% silent digital electronic bill-board informing me that a particular talk group is active. Of course, you can't/don't HEAR anything, but at least I have the comfort of knowing that a talk group is active. Can't believe what I have been missing.

I have officially thrown in the towel.

Considering that this purchase was primarily intended to monitor Hamilton County after my not updating to a digital scanner when they WENT digital some 10 years ago, I am now of the opinion that I spend almost $400 for, well, a useless product for me.

Don't get me wrong, it's my fault. I should have done more research ahead of time. I had blind faith that the scanner makers had done a LITTLE better job on digital than they had, but, that's on me. Shoulda' investigated.

A neighboring county (Clermont) is not coming in much better--- actually, no better. MARCS comes in fairly good, however---

Of course, warren county is still analog, and comes in great. It is my understanding that they are moving to MARCS within the next year or so. So I can expect decent reception of WC, but degraded over the current ancient analog system.

Oh yeah, Northern KY, some 20+ miles away (VHF/UHF) blows the windows out of my house.

...all for $400.

My scanner may be in the classifieds here soon. I can't imagine anyone wanting it, as it doesn't fulfill its intended purpose, but maybe there is a use for it, that I have no interest in, where it may excel.

Thanks for reading/listening...

That'll be the last time I dump $400 on a scanner, I can tell you that, GRE OR Uniden...what a shame...

 

[wa8pyr]

Don't get me wrong, it's my fault. I should have done more research ahead of time. I had blind faith that the scanner makers had done a LITTLE better job on digital than they had, but, that's on me. Shoulda' investigated.

Of course, warren county is still analog, and comes in great. It is my understanding that they are moving to MARCS within the next year or so. So I can expect decent reception of WC, but degraded over the current ancient analog system.

That'll be the last time I dump $400 on a scanner, I can tell you that, GRE OR Uniden...what a shame...

You're right, lots of research is called for; the issue of scanners with trunked P25 simulcast sites is well known. That being said, I have very little trouble with my GRE scanner by using a minimalist antenna and kicking in the attenuator as needed.

On the other hand, you really don't know how it's going to perform at your location(s) until you try it.

I personally think the manufacturers did an excellent job on the P25 issue; for what they are, the scanners perform quite well indeed, and I have little difficulty with them. Keep in mind that when they first came out there were virtually no P25 simulcast sites in existence, so LSM capability wasn't needed. On top of that, even now there really aren't too many P25 simulcast sites out there in the world... yet. Eventually, there will be more effort expended by the manufacturers to get the P25 codec tweaked to better handle LSM (Linear Simulcast Modulation, also popularly known as CQPSK) sites, but until it makes financial sense, they won't expend too much effort.

Scanners are also not $5000 commercial products, and are a performance compromise from the bottom up. Proper radios are designed to do one band (or maybe two) very, very well, with superior sensitivity and selectivity; scanners are designed to cover a spectrum slice of about 1000 MHz, with multiple reception modes, high sensitivity and questionable selectivity, and all kinds of bells and whistles one simply doesn't find in a real radio. They do what they're designed to do very nicely, but they're just not commercial grade radios.

And I hate to burst your bubble, but Warren County too, when they join MARCS, will be a P25 LSM simulcast site, just like Hamilton County; they're upgrading to the new MARCS platform, not the current one. If you're a respectable distance away your reception might be OK, but don't count your chickens before they're hatched.

 

[GrumpyAeroGuy]

I must be in a geographically unfortuneate area ref Hamilton County. I am happy your works well. I wish I could say the same for my situation.

In my case, not sure a minimalist antenna is the answer, and I'll give you my theory why. I think I understand why you are/would be using one ref a simulcast system.

I am getting absolutely poor reception of the control channel as it is. When attenuation is "added" it goes away completely. So, i have to conclude that I am not overloaded.

I believe the closest tower to me is Hauck Road ( I would be north of that). I am probably on the order of a mile, maybe a little more, north of the hauck tower as the crow flies.

Using a RS800 ducky antenna, it (HC) is awful. With the RS telescoping antenna, with the top section collapsed and the coil essentally at the "top", it is better than the ducky. Sometimes manipulating the length more (going shorter essentially) I can get things somewhat managable, but it's hit and miss.

I tried the overload theory with a Diamond stubby as well, and I lose everything on that system, as though it vanishes without a trace with that antenna.

I guess I could go with a correct YAGI for the 800 Band, and rotate it right at a tower, but, I must admit I am not SO interested as to go that far. I love a portable device that I can carry around the house.

I am willing to try something I haven't, and any suggestions you have would be appreciated --- understanding that there may be no good answer for me.

I appreciate the WC clarification. I assume the Lebenon Tower would still be the one most relevant to me, and it is not what I consider "close" to me at all. Thus, I may luck out there. Time will tell.

My frustration, though, remains significant.

I also recognize that the scanner makers have to design to a price point, as very few of us, me included, would shell out $5000 for a scanner --- as cool as it would work. I get that.

Just a shame that things can't be a little better. $400 isn't a huge amount given that the commercial portables are close to 10x that price. But, $400 is still not chump change when it is a 100% discretionary expense.

I still expected a little more, I suppose. Live and Learn I guess...

 

[scannerboy02]

May I ask what part of Hamilton County you are in? Is it possible that a cell phone tower may be causing issues with 800MHz in your area? I have noticed that I seem to have trouble with the Hamilton County system on my Uniden 396T when I am near cell towers.

Also are you having the same problems with both site 001 and 002?

 

[Matthew]

I don't want this to spiral into a GRE vs Uniden thread but ... my experience was nothing but frustration when I tried to use my 500 to monitor Hamilton County. It worked great on everything else but not Hamilton County. On the other hand my 396xt performs near flawlessly on Hamilton County's system.

Please remember though that everyone will have different experiences.

 

[scannerfreak]

My 500, 600, and 800 all perform without issue on the Hamco system from home (the IN/OH border).

Guess it all depends on your location and antenna setup. Every now and then when I get around the downtown area I start to get some multi-path issues. But they work pretty good around the 275 loop.

I guess I could go with a correct YAGI for the 800 Band, and rotate it right at a tower, but, I must admit I am not SO interested as to go that far. I love a portable device that I can carry around the house.

Yeah, if your not willing to go that far I'm not sure there's a lot you can really expect from any scanner.

 

[GrumpyAeroGuy]

May I ask what part of Hamilton County you are in? Is it possible that a cell phone tower may be causing issues with 800MHz in your area? I have noticed that I seem to have trouble with the Hamilton County system on my Uniden 396T when I am near cell towers.

Also are you having the same problems with both site 001 and 002?

Sorry folks, been out of town for a bit.

What part of HC: actually, I am just north of the hamilton COunty/Warren COunty line by about 1 mile.

There is, indeed, a cell phone tower in my vicinity. I would say it is about 1/2 mile from my house.

Sorry, site 1 / site 2? Not sure exactly what you mean, or how to check that.

 

[GrumpyAeroGuy]

Yeah, if your not willing to go that far I'm not sure there's a lot you can really expect from any scanner.

Not disagreeing with you at all.... doesn't take the frustration away though.

Again, not blaming anyone but myself. Live and learn I suppose.

Every now and then, HC does somewhat OK. More often than not, however, it is very poor, if not non-existant.

On occasion, strangely enough, it seems like all control channels for HC have some sort of periodic transmission on them, NOT a data stream, and the actual control channel has no discernable data on it, per the "Analyze" function on the scanner.

On other occasions, 3 of the 4 CCs have static, and the actual CC has an interpretable stream on it. On THESE occasions, HC does "OK".

Odd. I don't really know enough about the technology to interpret the above observation. I just observe it.

 

[radioscan]

Sorry, site 1 / site 2? Not sure exactly what you mean, or how to check that.

Site 01 is the countywide side of the system. Site 02 covers just Cincinnati proper.

 

[GrumpyAeroGuy]

Site 01 is the countywide side of the system. Site 02 covers just Cincinnati proper.

Ahhh, got it.

They perform about the same, with the Cinci site being slightly worse --- which doesn't surprise me too much, as I am much firther away from CIN propper as I am HC.