Home Patrol 1 Antenna Upgrade Suggestion.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jimbnks

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
201
Location
Central, KS
I'm looking for a different antenna for my HP-1.

Currently I still have a the stock HP-1 antenna. I'm looking for a good 800 MHZ one.

I've been looking at these three.




Thought?

Suggestions?
 

rvacs

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
396
Location
Tulsa, OK
I'm looking for a different antenna for my HP-1.

Currently I still have a the stock HP-1 antenna. I'm looking for a good 800 MHZ one.

I've been looking at these three.




Thought?

Suggestions?

I actually have all those and a couple others I have used on my HP-2.
The Top one although a little longer is BY FAR THE BEST. (Best for 800 Mhz. I get in the Analyze System a 6-7 where with stock I only get a 4 or 5 at best.

The lower 2 options are useless in fact I think the original antenna is better than the last 2.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
9,528
Location
Dallas, TX
I'm looking for a different antenna for my HP-1.

Currently I still have a the stock HP-1 antenna. I'm looking for a good 800 MHZ one.

I've been looking at these three.
Thought?

Suggestions?
You have your location as "Central, KS", which could be a lot of places. What actual county are you in, and what are you most interested in hearing? These antennas are aimed primarily at 700 and 800Mhz trunked systems. But of you have users like volunteer fire departments, or small town PD or sheriff's offices that still use Vhf, you're going to lose much of that reception.

Not sure where this antenna came from. I suspect it is an antenna from a different device that the seller has magically (in his or her mind) into the 'perfect antenna' for a Home Patrol. I seriously doubt that the claimed "7db+ or greater gain" is actual.

Here is an antenna, also intended to maximize 700 & 800Mhz systems from a much better known company:

The link is from Universal Radio, but a number of other online dealers also sell the same antenna.

This same seller was pushing a different antenna earlier this year:

Here's what the antenna really is for, and at a much more realistic price:

I suspect that the listing you showed is this same antenna, using the swivel base to use side-mounted on the HP series.
And, really? You need this antenna because it will cover both 700 & 800Mhz? If you buy that claim, I can hook you up with some beach front property in South Dakota.

I'll agree with rvac. Probably useless for most users. Not to mention overpriced as well.

I used this antenna, on my HP-1, when I spent a month in the hospital for surgery & rehab in 2013. It worked well for all my local systems, Vhf-high, Uhf, as well as 700 & 800Mhz.

It is a telescoping antenna, but has reference marks in the antenna with suggestions on how far to extend for various frequency bands. (Once again, the link is to Universal, but this antenna is available from a number of sources, including Amazon.
 

Jimbnks

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
201
Location
Central, KS
You have your location as "Central, KS", which could be a lot of places. What actual county are you in, and what are you most interested in hearing? These antennas are aimed primarily at 700 and 800Mhz trunked systems. But of you have users like volunteer fire departments, or small town PD or sheriff's offices that still use Vhf, you're going to lose much of that reception.

I’m in Rice Co, monitoring Rice Co on the KSICS system which is a 700 and 800Mhz trunked system. The has 100% of its operation on this system.

The issue is, the county has 4 towers, I live about 3.5 miles from one of the towers and on a good day the best signal I get is around 70% signal strength in the room the scanner is in (it’s better in other rooms).

I’ve got a Remtronix REM-800B on my BCD 436, and it's fantastic on the signal I hear all of the traffic.

On my HP-1, I’m missing some of the traffic between units with the stock antenna. I’m not sure if it’s just the speed of the scanner on the trunking system or the antenna.



With Remtronix REM-800B on the HP-1, I’m getting around 90% signal getting and a little more of the traffic, and getting a few other towers in the area, so I’m beginning to think it just process speed of the HP-1 scanner.



I’ve been leaning toward getting the Remtronix REM-800B or the Remtronix REM-810S, and buy the appropriate adapter, however, I was not to keen on buying the adapter.



I kind of figured the last two were hogwash to be polite. But never hurts to ask.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
9,528
Location
Dallas, TX
I’m in Rice Co, monitoring Rice Co on the KSICS system which is a 700 and 800Mhz trunked system. The has 100% of its operation on this system.

The issue is, the county has 4 towers, I live about 3.5 miles from one of the towers and on a good day the best signal I get is around 70% signal strength in the room the scanner is in (it’s better in other rooms).

I’ve got a Remtronix REM-800B on my BCD 436, and it's fantastic on the signal I hear all of the traffic.

On my HP-1, I’m missing some of the traffic between units with the stock antenna. I’m not sure if it’s just the speed of the scanner on the trunking system or the antenna.



With Remtronix REM-800B I the HP-1, I’m getting around 90% signal getting and a little more of the traffic, and getting a few other towers in the area, so I’m beginning to think it just process speed of the HP-1 scanner.



I’ve been leaning toward getting the Remtronix REM-800B or the Remtronix REM-810S, and buy the appropriate adapter, however, I was not to keen on buying the adapter.



I kind of figured the last two were hogwash to be polite. But never hurts to ask.
You should have gotten the SMA-> BNC adapter with the scanner, if you bought it new. Sometimes, like with my original 436HP, it is not obvious it was included, because it was in sort of a pocket of the cardboard that secured the scanner in the box for shipping. I use the adapter on my HP-1 & HP=2, along with a 90 degree BNC elbow so that the antenna can be positioned vertically. I also have quite a few other scanners, for various uses, that are BNC, so the adapter lets me include them in my antenna options. There are a couple of sources, now, where you can get an SMA to BNC adapter, that also includes the 90 degree elbow. While using one or more adapters does result in some signal loss, it is not enough to affect my reception of the systems I have programmed.

I use the REM-820S for my SDS100, since it has an SMA end on it that preserves the water resistance of the scanner.

The REM-830B is the same antenna as the REM-800 and REM-810, with the swivel base added. You would need to use an SMA->BNC adapter.

The stock antenna is a compromise, to try & provide reception on the 3 most used frequency bands: Vhf-high, Uhf, and the 700/800 MHz frequencies used by many of the trunking systems. Using the REM-800B on your HP-1, and getting somewhat better reception, confirms that a better antenna (for your area) would help. You have four KCICS sites in your county. Fortunately, none are simulcast. I doubt if processor speed alone is the root cause of your reception issues. The 436HP is much newer technology, and should, by default, have better sensitivity than the HP-1. The HP-1 (and -2, for that matter) are not deaf, but there are other scanners more sensitive than either, as well as some not as sensitive. Have you tried to see which KSICS site comes in best for you, and if so, does it carry all the talkgroups you need?
 

Jimbnks

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
201
Location
Central, KS
You should have gotten the SMA-> BNC adapter with the scanner, if you bought it new. Sometimes, like with my original 436HP, it is not obvious it was included, because it was in sort of a pocket of the cardboard that secured the scanner in the box for shipping. I use the adapter on my HP-1 & HP=2, along with a 90 degree BNC elbow so that the antenna can be positioned vertically. I also have quite a few other scanners, for various uses, that are BNC, so the adapter lets me include them in my antenna options. There are a couple of sources, now, where you can get an SMA to BNC adapter, that also includes the 90 degree elbow. While using one or more adapters does result in some signal loss, it is not enough to affect my reception of the systems I have programmed.
When I purchased it from Radio Shack, it did not have that in the box.

The stock antenna is a compromise, to try & provide reception on the 3 most used frequency bands: Vhf-high, Uhf, and the 700/800 MHz frequencies used by many of the trunking systems. Using the REM-800B on your HP-1, and getting somewhat better reception, confirms that a better antenna (for your area) would help. You have four KCICS sites in your county. Fortunately, none are simulcast. I doubt if processor speed alone is the root cause of your reception issues. The 436HP is much newer technology, and should, by default, have better sensitivity than the HP-1. The HP-1 (and -2, for that matter) are not deaf, but there are other scanners more sensitive than either, as well as some not as sensitive. Have you tried to see which KSICS site comes in best for you, and if so, does it carry all the talkgroups you need?
Yes, I'm lucky in the fact all towers in the county carry all talk groups I'm wanting to listen to. So I only monitor one tower.

I have also already done extensive system tracking using the extreme upgrade part of the software in the HP-1. For the county part, I know the 2 main frequencies usage order of the system, I also know the frequencies usage order of the system of the other departments that use the same tower. For the most part, I've dropped the other frequencies out of the tower list in hopes of getting more traffic.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
9,528
Location
Dallas, TX
Yes, I'm lucky in the fact all towers in the county carry all talk groups I'm wanting to listen to. So I only monitor one tower.

I have also already done extensive system tracking using the extreme upgrade part of the software in the HP-1. For the county part, I know the 2 main frequencies usage order of the system, I also know the frequencies usage order of the system of the other departments that use the same tower. For the most part, I've dropped the other frequencies out of the tower list in hopes of getting more traffic.
For most P25 trunked systems (as well as the older Motorola Type II systems), you only need the control channel plus the alternates (if any are specified in the database). For Harris P25 systems, you need all of the site frequencies, since the system may rotate control channels, and may use any of the site frequencies for a control channel. Deleting out the extra, voice channel, frequencies will not make a discernible difference in scan speed for that system.
 

Jimbnks

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
201
Location
Central, KS
For most P25 trunked systems (as well as the older Motorola Type II systems), you only need the control channel plus the alternates (if any are specified in the database). For Harris P25 systems, you need all of the site frequencies, since the system may rotate control channels, and may use any of the site frequencies for a control channel. Deleting out the extra, voice channel, frequencies will not make a discernible difference in scan speed for that system.
I've been trying the CC only for last 24 hour to see if that make any difference.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
9,528
Location
Dallas, TX
I've been trying the CC only for last 24 hour to see if that make any difference.
As long as you have the correct control channel, plus any identified alternates, I doubt you'll find a noticeable difference in scanning a P25 trunked system. Once the scanner finds the control channel, it does not, periodically cycle through the rest of the frequencies. It uses that specific control channel each time that system & site comes up during normal scanning.

The exception to that is if the system is one made by Harris. Those systems can and do use any of the assigned site frequencies as a control.
 

Jimbnks

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
201
Location
Central, KS
As long as you have the correct control channel, plus any identified alternates, I doubt you'll find a noticeable difference in scanning a P25 trunked system. Once the scanner finds the control channel, it does not, periodically cycle through the rest of the frequencies. It uses that specific control channel each time that system & site comes up during normal scanning.

The exception to that is if the system is one made by Harris. Those systems can and do use any of the assigned site frequencies as a control.
Thanks for the advise, I understand trunking system to a point how they work, but never tried a CC only scan. I also tried limiting my frequencies to the CC only scan and CC with two talk frequencies has vastly improved the amount of traffic I get now. Been thinking maybe it time I retire my HP-1 and go with BCD536HP with liking my BCD436HP so much.
 

hiegtx

Mentor
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
9,528
Location
Dallas, TX
Thanks for the advise, I understand trunking system to a point how they work, but never tried a CC only scan. I also tried limiting my frequencies to the CC only scan and CC with two talk frequencies has vastly improved the amount of traffic I get now. Been thinking maybe it time I retire my HP-1 and go with BCD536HP with liking my BCD436HP so much.
If you'd like more information, on how trunked systems work, see this Wiki page:
Trunking Basics - The RadioReference Wiki

You might also find this helpful:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top