My wishlist for the next "flagship" model...

[jonwienke]

Some thoughts on how holds should work in a multi-receiver context:

• Conventional channel: the active receiver parks on the frequency, and is flagged as busy until the hold is released. All remaining idle receivers continue to scan. The "last scanned" flag for the frequency is set with a reserved value, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere. The reserved "last scanned" value is cleared when the hold is released, and replaced with the current date/time.
• Conventional department: The active receiver continues scanning, but only frequencies in the department. The "last scanned" flag for each frequency checked is updated while doing so as in normal scanning, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere.
• Conventional system: The active receiver continues scanning, but only frequencies in the system. The "last scanned" flag for each frequency checked is updated while doing so as in normal scanning, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere.
• Trunked channel: The active receiver scans site frequencies for the selected system, and if a call on any enabled talkgroup is detected, the next available idle receiver is assigned the call. If no other receivers are available, the current receiver will jump to the voice channel if if the call is on the held talkgroup, and resume scanning sites when the call completes. Traffic on other talkgroups will be ignored. The "last scanned" flag for each site frequency checked is updated while doing so as in normal scanning, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere.
• Trunked department: The active receiver scans site frequencies for the selected system, and if a call on any enabled talkgroup is detected, the next available idle receiver is assigned the call. If no other receivers are available, the current receiver will jump to the voice channel if if the call is on any talkgroup in the held department, and resume scanning sites when the call completes. Traffic on other talkgroups will be ignored. The "last scanned" flag for each site frequency checked is updated while doing so as in normal scanning, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere.
• Trunked system: The active receiver scans site frequencies for the selected system, and if a call on any enabled talkgroup is detected, the next available idle receiver is assigned the call. If no other receivers are available, the current receiver will jump to the voice channel, and resume scanning sites when the call completes. The "last scanned" flag for each site frequency checked is updated while doing so as in normal scanning, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere.
• Trunked site: the active receiver parks on the site cotrol channel frequency, and is flagged as busy until the hold is released. All remaining idle receivers continue to scan. The "last scanned" flag for the site control channel frequency is set with a reserved value, so that all other idle receivers scan elsewhere. If a call on any enabled talkgroup is detected, the next available idle receiver is assigned the call. If no other receivers are available, the current receiver will jump to the voice channel, and return to the control channel at the conclusion of the call. The reserved "last scanned" value for the control channel is cleared when the site hold is released, and replaced with the current date/time.

 

[KB2GOM]

Your proposed method is less efficient, and would always miss more traffic. As long as they are not duplicating their efforts, multiple receivers working in parallel will find any activity, no matter which system, much faster than a single receiver.

Isn't that why people run multiple scanners now? (The defense calls no further witnesses.)

 

[jonwienke]

Isn't that why people run multiple scanners now? (The defense calls no further witnesses.)

Yes. Including myself.

What I'm proposing allows a single device to replace multiple current scanners, and coordinate scanning among all available internal receivers to balance the scanning load more evenly and effectively to miss less traffic. Using my scan setup as an example, if I'm listening to a call on one of the Frederick County conventional channels, I miss 100% of any other Frederick County traffic while that call is active. But that traffic would get captured with the device I'm proposing; while one receiver is handling the first Frederick County call, the remaining 3 would continue to scan all of my favorite lists, including the other Frederick County channels, and capture what they find. The only time I would miss anything completely is while I'm receiving 4 calls simultaneously, and additional calls happen while all 4 receivers are busy. That's going to be pretty rare.

The only other solution with current scanners would be to program all my scanners identically, and manually skip duplicate hits on the same transmission. That's a huge PITA to do manually. The proposed new scanner automates the process of coordinating the efforts of multiple receivers, ensuring everything gets scanned as often as possible, while preventing duplication of effort (multiple receivers scanning the same item at the same time).

 

[ShyFlyer]

I like the built-in GPS for the handheld version. I was very disappointed in Uniden when they went back to the rat's nest method of adding GPS to their handheld scanners. Thankfully I had my 436 modded and my SDS100 is using the now discontinued method.

A base model without a detachable faceplate for remote head use is a non-starter with me.

 

[Ubbe]

There is no compelling argument you can make to justify limiting scanning to just one receiver, to implement priorities that you can't accurately predict or program in advance.

Priority are always set in advance from the users unique preferences, there's no other way.

/Ubbe

 

[jonwienke]

Priority are always set in advance from the users unique preferences, there's no other way.

Precisely. Which is why you can't use priority scan settings to dynamically follow incident traffic of greater interest; that has to be done manually, by setting holds or avoids during the incident.

My proposed second dual receiver mode would have the first receiver to not stop at conversations, that could be a low priority one. It would just register the conversation and send it to the active list and then continue its search. That way it would find the higher priority conversations and not get stuck on lower priority calls and miss all the high priority calls.

Heres a little diagram to show why that's a bad idea:

Simultaneous Active Calls​	Scan Rate (all idle receivers scanning)​	Scan Rate (single receiver scanning)​
0​	320 channels/s (4 receivers scanning)	80 channels/s
1​	240 channels/s (3 receivers scanning)	80 channels/s
2​	160 channels/s (2 receivers scanning)	80 channels/s
3​	80 channels/s (1 receiver scanning)	80 channels/s
4​	0 - all receivers busy	0 - all receivers busy

Allowing all receivers to scan when not busy receiving a call means each frequency gets checked more often than if you have one designated scan receiver. More frequent frequency checking means less of the beginning of calls get missed.

The only time high priority traffic would get missed due to stopping on low-priority transmissions is when a high priority call begins while all receivers are busy receiving low-priority calls. That's not going to happen very often with 2 receivers, and exponentially less so with 4.

Dumping an active call to resume searching for other traffic that might be higher priority (or might not even exist) is something that should only be done manually by the user.

 

[ratboy]

A better front end would be nice. It falls apart when I put it in my car with a small mag mount antenna while at any of the three places I watch trains at. My Yaesu VX-170 is vastly superior on the same antenna for railband listening.
Improved AGC, there is a local company that has a truck that is SERIOUSLY LOUD. Same goes for a medical unit. I don't know how this could be solved. Both of them are too amusing at times to avoid.
The SDS200 should have all the connectors on the rear, and if it was a little bit bigger, with a larger speaker inside, I wouldn't complain about it.

 

[buddrousa]

I explain badly. It's not a single receiver system. One receiver are constantly searching for active systems and set a priority to what it finds and sends that info to the active list which the other receiver are monitoring.

You are then not forced to monitor uninteresting conversations from two monitoring receivers that have no clue of other more important conversations, as they are stuck monitoring the uninterested calls. You also get everything prioritized to your liking when monitoring only the active list with receiver #2.

Of course you could have 5 receivers, but one or several should always just scan and log to catch high priority calls in different systems.

/Ubbe

This is why I have 20 scanners running with PROSCAN and it is more controllable and TRAFFIC COPS are the first sent to any call here in the USA.

 

[kb7gjy]

As stated in one of the many other threads on this type of topic. Multi RX would be a welcome addition.

For a Base/Mobile additional RX model

The ability to add RX to the unit
1. The ability to add a dedicated RX to a certain band that is optimized for that band. Thinking kinda old school, but like the IC-900 and the 910 I believe. It added a RF deck which then allowed an additional antenna for that band. Not only would you be able to have a optimized RX for that band you could connect a optimized ant to that RX. (Think; Air Band/Mil-Air, 700 MHz, 800 MHz, 450 Mhz, Low Band, etc.)
2. FTO..... By having multi RX you could have one RX just looking for FTO. I never really understood the thinking of FTO in its current form.
A. Activate FTO and that is all it does. No scanning other traffic just sits there looking for tones. (Here I'm gonna buy a $700 unit for FTO).
3. With a multi RX that would transmit all the RX to a service (Broadcastify Calls?)

This is just a to add to the list that others have stated.

Also I really hope that if they don't offer a "software upgrade" to enable RX if it is already in the unit, IE it already has for 4 RX but to enable a RX for the low low price of $199 you can enable the next RX and if you act now and enable all of them now it will only cost $500 and save you $100).

 

[B_Mitchell]

How about MPT-1327 trunking decode ?
Better audio on handhelds.
No proprietary battery packs.

 

[buddrousa]

You know it would take a minimum of 10aa batteries to replace the SDS100 battery pack.

 

[jonwienke]

You know it would take a minimum of 10aa batteries to replace the SDS100 battery pack.

A pair of 18500 Li-ion batteries would come fairly close, but would require a significant change to the form factor of the battery compartment. Upgrading to a triple 18500 battery system would increase runtime about 50% over the current fat battery.

 

[buddrousa]

This would require a aftermarket charger

 

[werinshades]

When they make a scanner that can monitor encrypted conversations, then I'll be listening. Until then...

 

[RRR]

This would require a aftermarket charger

All that would need to be done is to have contacts placed on the outside of the battery cover (connected to the battery of course) that would connect onto a desk charger when placed in the cradle.

That could have easily been done with the current configuration.

 

[Ubbe]

Remember that each receiver needs a DSP to be able to decode data and a seperate band-filter setup and audio circuits and a also a CPU to handle everything. It's like a complete scanner without the front panel for each receiver. It will be an additional $300-400 for each receiver added.
If you look at Icom IC-R1500 analog only scanner it cost $599 when they where sold and the exact same scanner but dual receiver IC-R2500, which use a budget scaled down 2:nd receiver, cost $899 when that where sold.

Having 3 antenna ports would be nice. Uniden has 7 different band filters that gets connected between receiver and the antenna port depending of the frequency monitored. Just add two more swithing diodes to each filter so that eacj filter can be programmed to use any of the 3 antenna ports that will depend of what antennas you have connected to the ports.

/Ubbe

 

[MStep]

When they make a scanner that can monitor encrypted conversations, then I'll be listening. Until then...

Unfortunately, the whole purpose of encrypting communications is so that conversations cannot be monitored. So I think your"zzz" will be going on for a long time, and I don't mean that in any offensive way at all. And my "two cents" is more as an encouragement for those new to scanning that the sun has not necessarily set on our wonderful hobby. But I also think that "Happily scanning for 40 plus years", you already know that. And even with the big "E" looming, there are still many ways to garner information, at least insofar as proximity to "incident" via signal strength, severity of incident by number of transmissions, monitoring non-E communications of incident-involved "sister agencies", and the list goes on. I'm pointing that out more for those who are just beginning to dabble in the hobby. Newbies should use Radio Reference and other sites to garner information. Of course, monitoring here in NYC (or in another major city like Chicago) by working around those "E" operations is more fruitful than perhaps trying some of those communications intelligence tricks in smaller towns or communities who have switched to "E" for everything they do. When the dog catchers and the tree pruners have also switched over, then it may be "zzz" time for sure.

Getting back more to the topic of "flagship models", perhaps the fine-tuning of the "Close Call" function can be optimized for greater flexibility. One feature that was very impressive and useful on the older vintage 1970's Bearcat 250 was the ability to count (at least up to 99 on that model) the number of transmissions occurring on frequencies being monitored. I have not seen that on any subsequent models.

 

[werinshades]

Unfortunately, the whole purpose of encrypting communications is so that conversations cannot be monitored. So I think your"zzz" will be going on for a long time, and I don't mean that in any offensive way at all. And my "two cents" is more as an encouragement for those new to scanning that the sun has not necessarily set on our wonderful hobby. But I also think that "Happily scanning for 40 plus years", you already know that. And even with the big "E" looming, there are still many ways to garner information, at least insofar as proximity to "incident" via signal strength, severity of incident by number of transmissions, monitoring non-E communications of incident-involved "sister agencies", and the list goes on. I'm pointing that out more for those who are just beginning to dabble in the hobby. Newbies should use Radio Reference and other sites to garner information. Of course, monitoring here in NYC (or in another major city like Chicago) by working around those "E" operations is more fruitful than perhaps trying some of those communications intelligence tricks in smaller towns or communities who have switched to "E" for everything they do. When the dog catchers and the tree pruners have also switched over, then it may be "zzz" time for sure.

Getting back more to the topic of "flagship models", perhaps the fine-tuning of the "Close Call" function can be optimized for greater flexibility. One feature that was very impressive and useful on the older vintage 1970's Bearcat 250 was the ability to count (at least up to 99 on that model) the number of transmissions occurring on frequencies being monitored. I have not seen that on any subsequent models.

Any new "flagship" model's costs would continue to be a debate. With encryption becoming more common for public safety which "most" will purchase the scanner for, and you can thumb through the posts complaining about the costs of the SDS line. A dedicated scanner to a targeted listening group would be the best way to go..Aircraft, Railroad monitoring etc.

 

[KI6RVZ]

I’d like to see the following added to what the SDS100 currently has:

- internal GPS
- stronger battery door
- Bluetooth audio
- YSF/C4FM
- D-Star
- Siren/remote control and audio mobile app
- USB-C

SDS200 successor - all the above plus WiFi.

 

[RRR]

Ha, for the SDS series, continued performance increases, features and bug fixes, that we got until about 2 years ago, now crickets...