BCD325P2/BCD996P2: Is my BCD996P2 obsolete?
- Thread starter Saudeboy
- Start date
- Status
Yes frequency is within the scanners receive range. How well the 996p2 work in your new simulcast situation will depend on several variable. I use multiple 996p2 in a heavily simulcasted system with no issues. Others do not have the same success.
Your 996P2 is capable of receiving that frequency, so that alone is a non-issue.
More important, though, is the simulcast system. Simulcast distortion (on a scanner) is extremely location driven. If you are very close to one of the transmit towers, say a quarter mile, the very strong signal from that transmitter might drown out out of sync signals from the other sites. Or, if you are far enough out of the center, or can use a directional antenna to focus on only one transmitter, your scanner might still work. In some cases, using 'less' antenna, even only a paperclip, might help, and at times, using the attenuate setting can also be of assistance.
More on Simulcast can be found in the Wiki.
Simulcast digital distortion - The RadioReference Wiki
What system, and/or site, will you be trying to monitor?
If the location in your profile is correct, this is the map for the site you are listening to:
In your case, Concord is very close to one site. That strong signal is likely drowning out conflicting signals from more distant ones.
Iowa Statwide Interoperable Communication System (ISICS), RFSS-2(2), Site-019 (13) , Name-Chickasaw Co Simulcast , County- Chickasaw Co., Frequencies 769.71875, 769.96875a, 770.21875a, 770.46875c (primary). Does FreeSCAN have the correct software available?
I am in concord, but I have a large external omni antenna outside as well as a yagi that I switch between. I also have a 50ohm dummy load that goes into the rotation as needed. I also have a 996p2 set up in my office near UNC Charlotte. The 996P2s have done well for me but I know how to compensate when I am getting an overload. I have an SDS 200 sitting with one of my 996P2s at home and they operate nearly identical other than the 996 has a hotter receiver. I could however tell the difference between the 996p2 and the SDS200 and unication G5 in my truck as I traveled and i do not have the luxury swapping antennas as I drive...at least no safely.
Generally the "acid test" is to program your scanner as you think it should be for the desired system. Then bring it to a location about 1/4 mile from a transmitter site and give it a listen. If you hear the audio clearly there, but not very well at home or other usual monitoring location(s), it is a safe bet that simulcast distortion is a problem.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 5,647
This is all very sage and accurate advice that's right on the money. Your radio is not necessarily obsolete.
If you are in a heavily affected simulcast distortion area secondary to LSM as accurately described here your radio would take a backseat to an SDS radio or unication pager in addition to a few other options offered. Your radio would make a great backup for conventional stuff.
Another big difference not mentioned here is that your radio does not use an SD card or a data card. It only holds so much but that's a lot. A data card gives you the option of increasing how much your radio can hold. For most people that's a non-factor.
If you are in a heavily affected simulcast distortion area secondary to LSM as accurately described here your radio would take a backseat to an SDS radio or unication pager in addition to a few other options offered. Your radio would make a great backup for conventional stuff.
Another big difference not mentioned here is that your radio does not use an SD card or a data card. It only holds so much but that's a lot. A data card gives you the option of increasing how much your radio can hold. For most people that's a non-factor.
Not in all cases. They work great with simulcast in some circumstances for some people. I'm one of them, and I have a SDS200 to compare it to.
For the OP:
I think the key points here are:
First, the change to a new frequency is immaterial. That frequency in itself is well within the capabilities of your scanner.
Second, while your department of interest is changing to a simulcast system, that of itself is not always an end to the usefulness of your 996P2. Depending on your location, you may be able to still monitor your system, whether because of your proximity to a transmit tower for the simulcast, or by modification of antenna type or placement.
And, as trentbob mentioned, even if you cannot solve the Simulcast riddle on your current scanner, there are many other factive requencies where your 996P2 is still a useful asset.
I think the key points here are:
First, the change to a new frequency is immaterial. That frequency in itself is well within the capabilities of your scanner.
Second, while your department of interest is changing to a simulcast system, that of itself is not always an end to the usefulness of your 996P2. Depending on your location, you may be able to still monitor your system, whether because of your proximity to a transmit tower for the simulcast, or by modification of antenna type or placement.
And, as trentbob mentioned, even if you cannot solve the Simulcast riddle on your current scanner, there are many other factive requencies where your 996P2 is still a useful asset.
Thankfully I have almost no simulcast in my area, and in fact the change from analog to digital has been at a snails pace thankfully. I still use my old analogs like 246T, PSR-300 and my favorite 346XT nearly daily. When analog hits extinction levels here (it's only a matter of time) I plan on keeping the 346 running for air band. It's just too good of a radio to let go of
If you are able to receive using old school tricks on the 996P2 then you can always buy a second 996P2 to work on the rest of the traffic you want to hear.
- Status
