ICOM R-3 worth the $$$?

[scanman310]

Just wanted some feedback from folks who have luck (or un-luck) using the R-3 with the video from traffic cameras and the like. Will it do it? Is it worth the money?
Thanks
Matt

 

[MacombMonitor]

I've read reviews that claim the video reception is not that good. Also, the batteries it eats will cost more than the radio!

 

[w2usb]

I recently bought an R3. No luck yet with video camera reception, i have yet to try it with a 2.4 ghz antenna. It is an excellent receiver. Battery life is a big issue. If you use the sub vfo (small) you can get up to 23 hrs before recharge. But turn on the TFT display and forget it (an hour tops). It is nice to have a wide band receiver and TV in one unit. Just today I was listening to a big fire on the radio. I turned the TV on the R3 on and there it was (video of the fire local news). Pretty cool. BTW, bought the unblocked model on E-bay so I could receive 800 MHZ public safety frequencies.

Good Luck.

 

[scanman310]

OK, that pretty much answers the question about the traffic cams. I was unaware about how battery life consumption was. The R3 has been out a while and if battery life is still an issue, I guess I'll wait 'till something better comes along. BTW, supposedly ALL tv broadcasts are going digital by '07 so enjoy the analog tv while you can.
Thanks for the info guys!
Matt

 

[tfr]

Matt,

yeah, as a fellow R3 owner I have to agree with the guys above - the TV reception is pretty poor and the battery drains out darn quickly if you use the LCD, but for my own little particular case, these have not been a problem at all. Battery life without the LCD is excellent (20-24 hrs), and it's by far the most sensitive scanner I have ever seen. There's a bunch of other scanners in my vicinity (RS PRO-64, AOR 8200, Uniden SportCat 200, Yupiteru 7100) and there's a stack of frequencies where my R3 gets a clear signal where the others don't even get a garbled noise.

The auto squelch feature is also a darn convenient thing.

 

[w2usb]

I agree about the sensitivity of this receiver. I am getting solid performance on HF VHF and UHF.
I wish icom had included the ability to let you display alpha tags on the sub LCD. My R3 is a keeper.

73
W2USB

 

[scanman310]

I guess my whole purpose for buying one was to capture "hidden" camera video and to see who's gottem and where they are located. To see what the DOT is looking at would be coo too. So far, nobody has convinced me this thing will even do that. I don't doubt the receive capability or the sensitivity but I was hoping for better results in the "surveilance" side of things.
Thanks for the info!
Matt

 

[hotdjdave]

Analog Until Mid 2009

BTW, supposedly ALL tv broadcasts are going digital by '07 so enjoy the analog tv while you can.
Matt

The FCC has mandated that all TV broadcasters broadcast in digital by '07, but they will still be broadcasting in analog simultaneously until the second quarter of '09.

Also, I am not sure that DOT traffic cams are wireless.

Sources:
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123136,00.asp
http://www.governmententerprise.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=175006462
http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/news/n_01_some_time_in_2009.shtml
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...cial_s&q=2009+deadline+dtv+analog&btnG=Search

 

[radio10-8]

I called our traffic camera center for San Jose CA. I was told none of the traffic cameras are wireless. They are all linked together via fiber optic cable. (Much cheaper and less equipment failure than using transmitters.) Some of the collected signals are sent from building to building within the city using a microwave link. (Line of sight) Wireless cameras are in use for temporary sites such as airport parking lots, most of those will be replaced with hard wired system in next couple of months. Same system for Alameda County, Santa Clara County and San Mateo County

 

[hotdjdave]

I called our traffic camera center for San Jose CA. I was told none of the traffic cameras are wireless. They are all linked together via fiber optic cable. (Much cheaper and less equipment failure than using transmitters.) Some of the collected signals are sent from building to building within the city using a microwave link. (Line of sight) Wireless cameras are in use for temporary sites such as airport parking lots, most of those will be replaced with hard wired system in next couple of months. Same system for Alameda County, Santa Clara County and San Mateo County

Sounds like the wireless you are refering to here is microwave. The R3 will not pick this up, too high a frequency. Seems like the only way to make wireless work on a "traffic cam" would be to use directional wireless like microwave, otherwise the transmission power would have to be too high to get a signal to a receiver.

The wireless cameras you would be able to pick up using an R3 would be low power and you would probably have to be within close proximity to be able to receive the transmission.