Looking to get into the hobby.

[dunsparth]

Hello all a buddy of mine that lives in Indiana and is into scanning peaked my interest on wanting to get into the world of scanners.
I live in torrance,ca and am wanting to be able to pickup LAPD,LAFD & CHP and maybe some other local departments for fun, what would be a good beginner scanner for me to start getting into the hobby before i jump headfirst into something expensive like the SDS100 or SDS200 thanks all.

 

[es93546]

Hello all a buddy of mine that lives in Indiana and is into scanning peaked my interest on wanting to get into the world of scanners.
I live in torrance,ca and am wanting to be able to pickup LAPD,LAFD & CHP and maybe some other local departments for fun, what would be a good beginner scanner for me to start getting into the hobby before i jump headfirst into something expensive like the SDS100 or SDS200 thanks all.

Unfortunately, the L.A. basin is full of what are called "P25 Phase 2" systems. Some of them are simulcasted, which requires the SDS100/200 receivers. You will also find that many law enforcement agencies are now encrypting their communications or are on a path for doing that. Example is the L.A. Sheriffs Department, which is part way through the process. It won't be many years where encryption will be the rule, not the exception. This for law enforcement, but not so much for fire. If you like listening to fire more than law enforcement, like I do, it isn't as large of a loss for me. Given the technologies in radio systems their really isn't much of a beginner's scanner anymore.

That is just my opinion and I will let others, who actually live in southern California, make their comments. I live 320-375 miles away and don't have the expertise on the many systems down there to be an authority. I'm not up to date on the more inexpensive scanners either. Right now, in my rural location, the cheapest scanners will work for awhile, but there are plans to go to a digital trunked system for all Public Safety agencies in the county, by piggybacking on a new state system. So more expensive scanners will be needed even in the boondocks.

 

[dunsparth]

Unfortunately, the L.A. basin is full of what are called "P25 Phase 2" systems. Some of them are simulcasted, which requires the SDS100/200 receivers. You will also find that many law enforcement agencies are now encrypting their communications or are on a path for doing that. Example is the L.A. Sheriffs Department, which is part way through the process. It won't be many years where encryption will be the rule, not the exception. This for law enforcement, but not so much for fire. If you like listening to fire more than law enforcement, like I do, it isn't as large of a loss for me. Given the technologies in radio systems their really isn't much of a beginner's scanner anymore.

That is just my opinion and I will let others, who actually live in southern California, make their comments. I live 320-375 miles away and don't have the expertise on the many systems down there to be an authority. I'm not up to date on the more inexpensive scanners either. Right now, in my rural location, the cheapest scanners will work for awhile, but there are plans to go to a digital trunked system for all Public Safety agencies in the county, by piggybacking on a new state system. So more expensive scanners will be needed even in the boondocks.

Yeah ive been doing some research on here after i made this post and looks like the SDS100 is probably just going to be the best option for me or the whistler trx-1
Not sure what simulcast is but i have heard the word thrown around.

 

[es93546]

Yeah ive been doing some research on here after i made this post and looks like the SDS100 is probably just going to be the best option for me or the whistler trx-1
Not sure what simulcast is but i have heard the word thrown around.

Simulcast is when more than one radio site transmits the signal on the same frequency at the same time. It's complicated and I'm getting old and dumb, but the radio has to sort through all the transmissions and make the signal clear.

I just looked up the Torrance in the database and all of the police department is encrypted. I suggest you go to the Radio Reference Database and click onto browse, which will bring up a U.S. map, then click onto Calif., then L.A. County, and then just take a look at the radio systems. In the upper right you will see a label of trunked radio systems on the top line. Click on it. Then scroll down to "Interagency Communications Interoperability (ICI)" and click on it. Scroll down to find the Torrance PD. Under the "Mode" column you will see a bunch of D's and some DE's. Those stand for "Digital" and "Digital Encryption." We can't decrypt the signals of the "DE's." You might also note that the ICI is a Phase 1 system and that means is can be monitored (when not encrypted) by a non Phase 2 scanner. But you need to peruse all of L.A. County and that in itself is a tall order. Note what type of trunking systems are in use. Note who encrypts. See how that all lines up with what you want to listen to and what can be listened to. Take your time doing this, you may not need a Phase 2 scanner.

That being said for me personally I've always tried to buy the scanner with the most technology that is likely to be used in the area I live in. If you go on the cheap, you might find yourself buying more scanners at a lower price, driving up your long term costs, than to just buy once, buy expensive, something that includes the latest technology, buying less frequently and saving money as a result. But, keep in mind that more and more encryption is going to show up in law enforcement and it will happen more quickly than your chosen scanner will last.

Good luck!

 

[es93546]

Yeah ive been doing some research on here after i made this post and looks like the SDS100 is probably just going to be the best option for me or the whistler trx-1
Not sure what simulcast is but i have heard the word thrown around.

The TRX-1 does not handle simulcast while the SDS radios do.

 

[Randyk4661]

Living in Orange County and traveling into the Los Angeles area for work, the SDS100 would be best for listening while in a car, sitting at home the SDS200. Simulcast is used in the county and nothing worse getting the wrong scanner wanting to listen to more it can't handle.
Add the DMR option to fill in some extra channels. Light rail uses NXDN if you like that type of stuff.
There is much more to listen to in Los Angeles than there is here in the OC
The scanner has a steep learning curve and new users can get frustrated, Just remember the members of this group and all of Radio reference are here to help.

 

[dunsparth]

Hey guys just an update wanted to thank everyone for some insight since i made this thread I've done alot of reading and thinking things over.
And I have decided to go with an RTL-SDR v3 and use that with a raspberry pi 5 that i already have and boot SDRtrunk off that to listen to p25.
Think this will work fine for me just to tinker with until i get more into the hobby and i pretty much have everything already needed to make this happen just need the SDR dongle or two and some patience to get it all setup but i am pretty techy so believe i can make this all work.

 

[marcotor]

Depending on where you live, you will catch a lot, or a little. I personally think a P25 P2 capable scanner in the LA Basin will be money wasted if looking for Public Safety calls, as the traffic on the "Big 2" systems (LA-RICS. ICI is also continuing their buildout) is encrypted or will be in the near future. It sounds like you came up with a plan, good luck with your adventure!

 

[ladn]

I live in torrance,ca and am wanting to be able to pickup LAPD,LAFD & CHP and maybe some other local departments

Welcome to RR!
LAPD is (mostly) conventional P-25 UHF, LAFD is analog 800 MHz, with some VHF high band for interop with LA County FD and other agencies. CHP is (for now) VHF low bad with extenders on 700 MHz P-25 digital. Your local PD/FD are on a UHF digital trunked system that's encrypted. LA County FD is (mostly) conventional UHF for dispatch and routine calls and VHF high band for interop with other agencies like USFS and LAFD. Aircraft are VHF-AM (military aircraft also use UHF-AM). Marine (maritime) radio traffic is mostly VHF FM highband.

The best "beginner" scanner would have been the Uniden BC 125-AT, but it is analog only and doesn't have 800 MHz. Next up is the Uniden BC-325-P2. It's analog AM/FM and P-25 digital right out of the box and can be upgraded to other digital modes. It covers all the band's you'll need It's less expensive and less complex then the SDS series of radios, but there's still a steep learning curve.

 

[es93546]

Welcome to RR!
LAPD is (mostly) conventional P-25 UHF, LAFD is analog 800 MHz, with some VHF high band for interop with LA County FD and other agencies. CHP is (for now) VHF low bad with extenders on 700 MHz P-25 digital. Your local PD/FD are on a UHF digital trunked system that's encrypted. LA County FD is (mostly) conventional UHF for dispatch and routine calls and VHF high band for interop with other agencies like USFS and LAFD. Aircraft are VHF-AM (military aircraft also use UHF-AM). Marine (maritime) radio traffic is mostly VHF FM highband.

The best "beginner" scanner would have been the Uniden BC 125-AT, but it is analog only and doesn't have 800 MHz. Next up is the Uniden BC-325-P2. It's analog AM/FM and P-25 digital right out of the box and can be upgraded to other digital modes. It covers all the band's you'll need It's less expensive and less complex then the SDS series of radios, but there's still a steep learning curve.

I'll second the motion that the BCD325P2 has a steep learning curve. I've had mine for nearly 3 years and there are functions I still don't understand. There is an "Easier To Read" booklet available, that really isn't easier to read. It seems to me that they leave out steps, assuming you will be able to surmise them. Then there is finding instructions in the book, there might be something essential 30 pages further into the book that affects what you are trying to do on page 6.

I'm not interested in the SDS-100 and SDS-200 radios because some members here have reported they don't do all that well on VHF High. That is where the natural resource agencies that I'm primarily interested in are located. I don't see any simulcast systems on the horizon in my rural area. We just got our second P25 Phase 2 system in the last year. I monitor both on my 325. I suspect all of law enforcement in athe county will be migrating to the CRIS system in the next several years, but I don't think they will simulcast.

Down the list one step for my interest is fire and in rural areas they are sticking to VHF High, for the most part, for interoperability with the feds and the state. Wildland fire is going to be on VHF High for a very long time so the SDS series isn't good for that. Of course things are different in the SOCAL megalopolis as predominately structural departments can be found on all the bands. Some people find natural resource agencies and fire to be boring compared to busy law enforcement channels and to each their own. Since I'm retired from the USFS and worked with all those agencies and participated in wildland fire prevention and suppression it's natural I would want to listen to that.

I hope these discussions benefit the OP in finding out what he wants to listen to. Law enforcement listening is going to be increasingly difficult, if not rare.

 

[AM909]

I'm not interested in the SDS-100 and SDS-200 radios because some members here have reported they don't do all that well on VHF High.

I wonder if the SDS are actually poor at VHF as compared to real radios or if it's really just the nature of VHF now, with lots of unintentional emitters and others that are actually supposed to be there that are causing interference for other reasons, or users that are expecting to hear VHF simplex with lower-performance antennas from HTs and mobiles as clear as mountaintop sites on UHF and 800. There's also the increased incidence of "skip" that seems to be related.

 

[nd5y]

I wonder if the SDS are actually poor at VHF as compared to real radios

All scanners have consumer-grade junk wide range receivers. Even low end Japanese VHF/UHF ham rigs will receive better (in the ham bands at least) than a scanner.

 

[es93546]

I wonder if the SDS are actually poor at VHF as compared to real radios or if it's really just the nature of VHF now, with lots of unintentional emitters and others that are actually supposed to be there that are causing interference for other reasons, or users that are expecting to hear VHF simplex with lower-performance antennas from HTs and mobiles as clear as mountaintop sites on UHF and 800. There's also the increased incidence of "skip" that seems to be related.

I just passed along what members have said here in various forum posts. My primary receiver is a GRE PSR-600 and it does quite well on VHF High and 800 MHz with a rooftop discone. My next project is to put up some 2 meter antennas to replace the discone. Discones are equally bad on a wide range of frequencies. I expect the 2 meter antennas will pull in VHF High very well.

 

[Eng74]

I would go with a BCD436HP. It works on P25, and phase 2 and works better on VHF/UHF than the SDS-100. It works on the ICS for Verdugo fire which a lot of the city’s that LA and LACoFD do not cover. I would upgrade the antenna to the Remtronix REM-824S. It works better than the stock antenna.

 

[a727469]

Forgetting simulcast, My best scanner for me and my area with much vhf both analog and digital and some 800 is the BCD996p2 without a doubt. My sds200 is fine and fun but for ease of programming and daily listening the 996 takes the prize. If you must have a handheld, my bcd325 is similar and good with some limitations which others have mentioned in other posts. I have had the sds100 and the 436 and 536 and sold them although many love them. While the 436 and 536 are newer than the 996, I just could not see the advantage. I would rather spend a few more dollars on the sds100 or 200..again just me. There are cheaper options like the BCD160DN or BCD260DN but they may not meet your local requirements for trunking or modulation.

 

[AM909]

I've benched a number of CCRs and a 996T and all are reasonably sensitive across their range, unlike the old Bearcat and crystal-controlled scanners. Of course, sensitivity is only part of the game. In the real world, especially in congested areas, we know IP3, IF selectivity, etc. are important. With handhelds, antenna quality varies widely, too. Has anyone seen recent reviews that delve deeper into these factors?