Home Patrol 2 mobile.

[10-43]

Remember that you can use a Favorites list for one of your other, such as your SDS100, or one of the x36H{ scanners in your HP-2.

You cannot directly take a list for an SDS or x36HP scanners and load it straight to your HP-2. But what you can do is this:

If you have not already done so, install the Sentinel version for the HP-1/HP-2.

In Sentinel for the SDS and x36HP scanners, pick the Favorites list that you want to use.
From the drop-down File menu, choose "export to *.hpe file".
Sentinel will ask you to select the list you want to export. Select the list, Sentinel will pop-up a window showing the systems in that Favorites list file. If there is one, or more, that you don;t want to export, because they are, say, DMR or NXDN, which the HP-2 cannot handle, deselect any systems that you don't want to transfer and proceed with the export.

Save the exported *.hpe file to a folder you can get to.

Start the Sentinel version for the HP-2 & choose "Import from hpe file (Favorites list).
Sentinel will ask you for what name you wish to use. Specify the list name to use, then proceed.

Sentinel, for the HP-2, will import the System, Site, and Departments from your exported list. It will simply ignore settings from the SDS/x36HP version of Sentinel, such as quick keys, alert LED settings, etc. The base detail for a system, and it's Site and Department, is the same for these two different scanner families.

Note that, if adding an SDS or x36HP to your scanners. you can use an exported file from an HP-1 or HP-2 to get a head start on Favorites for the upgraded scanner. Here again, the basic system, site, and department details are the same. Once you import a list from an HP-1 or HP-2, then you would fill in any other details used by the newer scanner, such as quick keys and Alert led settings,

Thanks! I earlier exported and imported a system. I had a few issues, so I deleted it and will work on transferring systems again tomorrow. I really didn't have much time to work on it, so will try again later.

 

[dmfalk]

I can vouch for the interchangeability of Favourites Lists between the two Sentinel versions and my HP-2 & SDS100! (This includes, amongst others, one FL containing exactly one frequency: WWV 25MHz, the lowest receivable station on both receivers!)

 

[10-43]

Can anyone comment about receiver sensitivity of the HP2 compared to maybe the BCD325P2, SDS100 or even the BCD396XT? I noticed lower sensitivity on the weather channels. I only was really aware of this because the usual weather channel used at my location was noisier than usual with my other scanners. Using the same antenna swapped out between other radios and in the same physical location, it is less. Been trying to check sensitivity on other frequencies. VHF is seems fine. Not a whole lot of convention stuff around here to check. Holding on a control channel in 700/800 also seems to be a bit less sensitive than the SDS100 and BCD325P2.

The receiver specs in the manual are pretty much the same as the BCD325P2.

 

[jack103]

No! I never actually complained. The 3D printed looks printed as most such items do which is often an ugly texture and isn't the same as the OEM that looks very nice. The 3D printed price is more than the OEM was. For what it is by itself, seems over priced, but when nothing else is available what choice is there? And there is part of the price point. Nothing else available. I would much prefer finding the OEM somewhere.

 

[jack103]

What to you expect for $25 from an armature printer ,

 

[10-43]

Ok, so looking more carefully at the specs of the BCD325P2 and the HP2 I discovered a discrepancy. Something is left out. Below are the specs. Keep in mind that the weather channels are 162.4 to 162.55.

The reception of WX on HP2 is usable, but noticeably noisy compared to the 325 and other scanners. I will have to see if this is an issue monitoring national park service P25 on 172 Mhz when I travel the Blue Ridge Parkway. I can't receive it from here about 50 miles away.


HP2





BCD325P2

 

[dmfalk]

I can only compare my HP-2 to my SDS100, and will say this:

The HP-2 is good. Really good. On WX, it's better than any other weatherband radio I've ever had before.

That is, until I got the SDS100!

DAMN! I get three channels easily here (from Eureka, CA, I get the Humboldt Bay (2) and Willow Creek (5) channels strongly, and the Crescent City (1, 75 miles north) clearly, but not as strong. There is one on channel 6, but I have to use IFX on the '100 to block IF image reception, with the remaining signal too weak to otherwise identify, but it's definitely not a local WX station), but on most of the radios here, the Crescent City station, is not strong enough for clear reception.... With the HP-2, it's noisy but copyable, which is better than any other I've used, which likely just wouldn't receive it, or just barely copyable, but even though it's not the strongest, on the SDS100, it's clear and free of most noise, considering the distance. Both used nearly identical Comet W100RX antennas.

I would recommend the HP-2, as it's been an excellent scanner, and better than any scanner I have had before it, and had been my workhorse scanner since 2017..... But the SDS100 has since really blown me away.

 

[10-43]

What to you expect for $25 from an armature printer ,

I can only compare my HP-2 to my SDS100, and will say this:

The HP-2 is good. Really good. On WX, it's better than any other weatherband radio I've ever had before.

That is, until I got the SDS100!

DAMN! I get three channels easily here (from Eureka, CA, I get the Humboldt Bay (2) and Willow Creek (5) channels strongly, and the Crescent City (1, 75 miles north) clearly, but not as strong. There is one on channel 6, but I have to use IFX on the '100 to block IF image reception, with the remaining signal too weak to otherwise identify, but it's definitely not a local WX station), but on most of the radios here, the Crescent City station, is not strong enough for clear reception.... With the HP-2, it's noisy but copyable, which is better than any other I've used, which likely just wouldn't receive it, or just barely copyable, but even though it's not the strongest, on the SDS100, it's clear and free of most noise, considering the distance. Both used nearly identical Comet W100RX antennas.

I would recommend the HP-2, as it's been an excellent scanner, and better than any scanner I have had before it, and had been my workhorse scanner since 2017..... But the SDS100 has since really blown me away.

Wow. Thanks for that. Your results help me confirm this is the usual performance of the HP2 which isn't bad, just not as good on WX as the SDS 100. I was trying to figure if I received a bad copy. I did compare the HP2 to my SDS100 and had similar behavior to yours. I didn't have to apply IFX to any WX channels on the SDS100, but some that are a bit noisy and readable on the HP2 are clear on the SDS100. Same on my BCD325P2 as it is similar to the SDS100.

I don't have a working signal generator at the moment for precise testing, but I used my antenna analyzer as an uncalibrated signal generator and compared the BCD325P2 to the HP2 on the same frequencies. I can tell the HP2 is less sensitive on WX than the 325, but I can't measure how much. Good news is, on 700/800 they are very close. Very close on the following tested frequencies. 30, 50, 118, 125, 140, 156.8, 160, 170, 400, 460, 510, 760 and 850. On 162.3 MHz I could hear the difference. From experience just listening it didn't seem to be so bad. My impression is it isn't more than 3db difference. But I would have to measure it properly to know for sure. Given what little bit I was able to test, I'm satisfied it is working fine. I just wanted to be sure I did receive a bad copy. The specs in the manual do not show any results between 135.5 and 197.45 which suggests it was avoided to prevent a negative opinion. Reality is, if it is 3bd difference then instead of at 162.3 Mhz possibly being 0.3uV it would be 0.6uV sensitivity which is still pretty good. Just not as good as the BCD325P2 spec of 0.3uV at 161.985 Mhz according to the manual. When I get a working signal generator, I can do proper testing.
Thanks!

 

[10-43]

What to you expect for $25 from an armature printer ,

Yeah, I know. I'll likely wind up buying the ugly 3D printed one. I'm still evaluating this HP2 right now. So holding off on accessories and the Extreme upgrade. I've had to adjust my expectations a bit. I can't really compare reception to the BCD325P2. That one is a bit better, but what I like is the ease of operating the HP2 which is why I want it mobile, as well as the size. Not too big to mount it in the car. Display is large and easy to read. More text for channels. Easy to select what to monitor. Audio is very nice.

 

[rf_patriot200]

No! I never actually complained. The 3D printed looks printed as most such items do which is often an ugly texture and isn't the same as the OEM that looks very nice. The 3D printed price is more than the OEM was. For what it is by itself, seems over priced, but when nothing else is available what choice is there? And there is part of the price point. Nothing else available. I would much prefer finding the OEM somewhere.

I think scannermaster.com sells the oem vent bracket in their accessories column.

 

[10-43]

I think scannermaster.com sells the oem vent bracket in their accessories column.

They are out of every single kit version. So far, so is everyone else.

 

[Ubbe]

Reality is, if it is 3bd difference then instead of at 162.3 Mhz possibly being 0.3uV it would be 0.6uV sensitivity which is still pretty good.

If you got a 3dB worse sensitive from 0,3uV it would be 0,45uV
A 6dB difference are double the uV.

http://wa8lmf.net/miscinfo/dBm-to-Microvolts.pdf

/Ubbe

 

[10-43]

If you got a 3dB worse sensitive from 0,3uV it would be 0,45uV
A 6dB difference are double the uV.

http://wa8lmf.net/miscinfo/dBm-to-Microvolts.pdf

/Ubbe

Yep, my bad. I was just doubling the micrvolts. Not doubling the power.

If you got a 3dB worse sensitive from 0,3uV it would be 0,45uV
A 6dB difference are double the uV.

http://wa8lmf.net/miscinfo/dBm-to-Microvolts.pdf

/Ubbe

Yep! My bad, I was thinking half power. I like those charts. Makes it easy. When I noticed the difference between the HP2 and all my other radios receiving weather channels I was thinking, oh no, got a bad one. However, it seems to be just around those frequencies and not everywhere else. I really need to get a comm test set. I have an old sig gen that needs fixing and one of those cheap vector analyzers from china, but it's dead. We moved recently and I don't have my work bench setup yet. So, I used my antenna analyzer as a sig gen with no measurement of output. Antenna analyzer only goes to 170 MHz, but I used harmonics of the output all the way up to 850 Mhz. What I did was compare it to the BCD325P2 to try and compare sensitivity between each. I maybe could get more accurate comparison putting a volt meter on the audio output and using a variable attenuator which I do not currently have, and try to do 10dB or 20dB S/N, but listening for quieting without squelch gave me a pretty good idea how it compared to the BCD325P2. Not scientific, but informative. I'm satisfied the HP2 is doing fine. It was nice to hear from dmfalk about a comparison of the HP2 with the SDS100. It's similar to what I get comparing with the SDS100 and the BCD325P2.

99% sure I am keeping the HP2. It doesn't handle simulcast, but fortunately there are locations in my house where it does very well on the local simulcast. I buy it to monitor that system, but I like they way it operates. I got it for mobile use on the statewide system with 242 sites of which only 3 are simulcast and not where I travel. That system is supposed to go P2 next year, but I have seen no plans to convert sites to simulcast. I already have a GPS receiver setup I have been using for the SDS100 in the car. The HP2 with GPS for the statewide 242 site system should be nice.

Thanks, UBBE.

 

[10-43]

Yeah, I know. I'll likely wind up buying the ugly 3D printed one. I'm still evaluating this HP2 right now. So holding off on accessories and the Extreme upgrade. I've had to adjust my expectations a bit. I can't really compare reception to the BCD325P2. That one is a bit better, but what I like is the ease of operating the HP2 which is why I want it mobile, as well as the size. Not too big to mount it in the car. Display is large and easy to read. More text for channels. Easy to select what to monitor. Audio is very nice.

I must be confident of keeping the HP2. I ordered the 3D printed mount. Anxious to try it mobile. Now I need to talk myself into the Extreme upgrade.

 

[phask]

I must be confident of keeping the HP2. I ordered the 3D printed mount. Anxious to try it mobile. Now I need to talk myself into the Extreme upgrade.

The one thing I used to use more than anything with extreme is Power Plot. Easiest way to compare antennas or reception issues. I've carried an HP up on the roof way too many times.

 

[Blackswan73]

The HP-2 works well with a RS800/Remtronics antenna. You’re right, the factory antenna sucks

B.S.

 

[10-43]

The HP-2 works well with a RS800/Remtronics antenna. You’re right, the factory antenna sucks

B.S.

Forgot I had one of those. Trying it out now. I was using the antenna for the SDS100 which works better, and the one for the BCD325P2.

 

[10-43]

Okay. What would be great would be a Home Patrol 3 with the SDR as the final IF and the RF front end like with the BCD325P2.

 

[Ubbe]

I used my antenna analyzer as a sig gen with no measurement of output.

Measuring sensitivity connected directly to a signal generator are one thing, then most of Icoms receivers/scanner would read fantastic numbers. It is when you connect a receiver to a real antenna and then insert the signal into that coax where you measure how it holds up to you own RF environment. Most receivers lose sensitivity in that measurement except maybe a Pro-2006 type of scanner and professional 2-way radios. If you have no strong signals in your location an Icom type of receiver might work fine but most of us have interfering signals and then a Pro-2006 with a 0,5uV sensitivty could receive better than an Icoms 0,15uV.

A SDR dongle are easily overloaded and the SDR that Uniden uses in SDS100/200 have been put behind a preamplifier to raise its sensitivity to a conventional scanners, but then makes it even more suspect to overload issues.

/Ubbe

 

[10-43]

Measuring sensitivity connected directly to a signal generator are one thing, then most of Icoms receivers/scanner would read fantastic numbers. It is when you connect a receiver to a real antenna and then insert the signal into that coax where you measure how it holds up to you own RF environment. Most receivers lose sensitivity in that measurement except maybe a Pro-2006 type of scanner and professional 2-way radios. If you have no strong signals in your location an Icom type of receiver might work fine but most of us have interfering signals and then a Pro-2006 with a 0,5uV sensitivty could receive better than an Icoms 0,15uV.

A SDR dongle are easily overloaded and the SDR that Uniden uses in SDS100/200 have been put behind a preamplifier to raise its sensitivity to a conventional scanners, but then makes it even more suspect to overload issues.

/Ubbe

Yep. Actual environment certainly matters a lot. I have had amateur radio transceivers that were terrible in a RF rich environment. An Alinco handheld was the worst, and the signal environment was not really very bad. I don't recall the model. Couldn't wait to get rid of it.

The Icom handheld airband transceivers we had on base when I was doing airfield systems maintenance were horrible. You couldn't bring them in the office anywhere near a computer. Actually anywhere an office had a computer. Personally I bought myself a Standard Verizon Radio which was much better!