New idea for new scanners

Status
Not open for further replies.

n0xmz

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
39
Location
Austin, TX
Today's highest-end scanners are faster and loaded with features. Innovations such as dynamically-allocated memory, alpha-displays, computer control/programming, P25, trunking, etc. are fantastic. Even with all these great new features, today's highest-end scanner is no different from the crystal-controlled scanners of the 1980s in one key respect - they can only scan one channel at a time.

Today, an entire receiver can be put on one small chip. Imagine a bank of such chips, say 10 of them, in one scanner. Imagine your scanner being able to scan 10 (or more!) systems ALL AT THE SAME TIME. The user simply assigns priorities to the systems in order of which one gets the speaker should activity appear on more than one scanned system simultaneously. One should also be able to group systems to the same priority code, the same way a quick key can be assgned to multiple systems. No longer would I miss a call on the local PD system because the scanner was busy scanning through the federal system.

Make sense? Simple concept, no? I call it "Simul-Scan". Royalties can be paid directly to me. My address is good on the FCC ULS under amateur license n0xmz. :D
 
Last edited:

Stick0413

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 16, 2005
Messages
1,118
Location
Hopewell, VA
Imagine the cost of doing that... I am not 100% sure how it would work but I am sure the P25 ppl would be getting money out of each of the chips... Great idea in principal but it would be a lot of cost to doing this.
 

Zack08

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Messages
97
Unfortunately, to have good selectivity and sensitivity on 800 Mhz and below, you need many more parts than whats inside of those all-in-one receiver ICs.

Also, you would need much more amplification in the front end to split the signal among several receivers and still have good sensitivity. With more amplifier stages, you *usually* introduce more noise onto the RF signal.
 

chrismol1

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
236
yea and imagine how it would sound picking up like 5 diff channels at once
yeh, like having 5 different speaker jacks at the back of the scanner, pointless casue theres only 1 receiver

I KNOW HOW TO SOLVE!!!!

READY: Multiple scanners
if you had enoguh money and researched tho.....
 

AK9R

Lead Wiki Manager
Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
6,592
Location
Central Indiana
Interesting idea. Five might be too many, but two would certainly be doable. Look at all of the dual-band amateur radio handhelds and mobiles that can receive two signals simultaneously. Some of them will scan through channels on both receivers simultaneously. Granted, they aren't doing P25 decoding.
 

joetnymedic

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
758
Location
West Haven, CT
We're paying over $500.00 for scanners now, I can just imagine what something like this would cost - lol

Then again pretty soon that'll be cheaper than a tank of gas
 

jack103

Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2002
Messages
458
Location
Tewksbury MA
At $500 + dollars for a new scanner or 1/2 a tank of heating oil I bet most will keep their old scanners and try to stay warm this winter!!
 

joetnymedic

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
758
Location
West Haven, CT
Hey Bama,
You're right - I'm gonna supply myself with Gas and Oil to get where I have to go and keep me somewhat warm when there's a ton of snow out there and I won't be demanding anything about a new scanner (although I'd like one but I already know - it ain't gonna happen anytime soon the way things are)

joe
 

gmclam

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
5,777
Location
Fair Oaks, CA
This is how I've always felt the so-called "dual" and "triple" trunking scanners should work. There should be one receiver for each TRS being monitored, one receiver for conventional channels, and one optional receiver for a priority "channel".

As it is right now, scanners which try to monitor conventional and/or more than one TRS miss way too much stuff. I've ended up using one scanner for just my local TRS and another for everything else. Then if I need to lock onto a channel I turn on a 3rd scanner. It would be nice if I had a single scanner that didn't miss TRS traffic because it was checking some conventional channel at the time the data came over the control channel.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Hey Bama,
You're right - I'm gonna supply myself with Gas and Oil to get where I have to go and keep me somewhat warm when there's a ton of snow out there and I won't be demanding anything about a new scanner (although I'd like one but I already know - it ain't gonna happen anytime soon the way things are)

joe

Thanks for the agreeing :):)
 

jon_k

Member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
271
Location
Fort Worth, Republic of Texas
Imagine the cost of doing that... I am not 100% sure how it would work but I am sure the P25 ppl would be getting money out of each of the chips... Great idea in principal but it would be a lot of cost to doing this.
Amateur Radios are doing dual-band receive (Yes it's already got a name.) I'm not sure why they call it dual-band receive as I can tune to two things in the same band. Anyways, my VX-7R has this functionality and the radio was around $300. I don't see why a scanner couldn't do this.

In my opinion this is more valuable on a HAM radio. Just tune in to one VFO and talk on that one. Set the other one to MR to scan your repeaters. Transmit as necessary. This would be great in a scanner though, scan conventional on one VFO, monitor your trunks on the other. It would cut scanning time in half and make you miss that much less!
 
Last edited:

scrotumola

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2001
Messages
330
Location
So. Texas
Then there is always the Icom PCR/R2500 with dual receivers. Third party software allows trunking and dual watch mode and P25 on the main band.
 

n0xmz

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
39
Location
Austin, TX
I think gmclam and W9RXR are seeing my vision a little more clearly that some others. The point that most seem to be missing is this: As a user, I have already programmed the scanner to give priority to certain systems over others. For example, I give the local pd #1, the sheriff #2, and the feds #3. Whoever goes active first, gets the output. If 2 or more systems go active at exactly the same time (which would be rare) then the one with the highest priority wins.

This also provides for another application: Let's say the scanner stops on the sheriff and he's running plates. Ho-hum. A second receiver can scan in the background for pre-set priority channels (like PD dispatch or surveillance). I'd sure hate to miss a more exciting call on the PD freq. because the scanner is locked on the sheriff.

Here's yet another application: One thing I hate about Close Call is that it really doen't work "in the background". When I'm listening to something else, the close call interrupts every 2 seconds for about 1 second to do the Close Call search. Why not have a dedicated RX that does nothing but listen for CC?

Radiorat47 does raise a good point. We do have some very low-noise amplifiers nowadays so I wonder how much such effects can be mitigated.
 
Last edited:

SAR923

Active Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,514
Can you just imagine the number of posts that would begin with "I'm totally confused..." if something like this got implemented in a consumer grade scanner? :) I kind of think we've about reached the limit of most people's learning curves right now.
 

AK9R

Lead Wiki Manager
Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
6,592
Location
Central Indiana
For example, I give the local pd #1, the sheriff #2, and the feds #3. Whoever goes active first, gets the output. If 2 or more systems go active at exactly the same time (which would be rare) then the one with the highest priority wins.
My Kenwood dual-band mobiles have a MUTE function that mutes the audio from the secondary receiver if the primary receiver is active. Makes it pretty easy to stay on top of important calls in the primary receiver while monitoring other stuff on the secondary receiver. They also have two speaker outputs. At home I run one receiver to one speaker, the other receiver to another speaker. With about 4 feet of separation between the speakers, you can sit between them and keep up with two conversations at once.
 

Zaratsu

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
359
Location
Eastern Connecticut
I didnt read all the responses but I saw it mentioned. The problem is selectivity and licsence fees. Essentially, in a mass-production enviroment where the final product is very inexpensive to replicate and raw materials are low, you have to make money on intellectual property.

Also, although a single IC can do the whole job, there is much more to an effective scanner. You could have a broadband scanner that would cover everything poorly.

You ARE on to something though, and I do believe that most of the digital scanners today are a hybrid of a seperate digital and seperate analog scanner in one, and I do think that the industry missed a big opportunity in the years before digital took off to market a "dual" scanner, or two scanners in one. Maybe dual outputs like a seperate phono output and display for Aircraft frequencies on AM?


The feature I would think would take off would be a two or three tiered priority feature. Works like this: You have a major emergency going on in town, you need to scan all of your stored frequencies, but if the local FD keys up, you hear them. However, you think that the local PD is more important to hear. So say your scanner is on a normal priority freq like mall security or something stupid, the FD keys up as it would on any PRI function, Now the PD keys up and the scanner switches to the higher-priority PD over the FD. Now you would then have a "SUPER HIGH PRIORITY" for those frequencies that nobody uses unless zombies/ufos/godzilla attacks. You dont want to miss a statewide change in alert level command being sent because the local police were chasing some purse-snatcher.

The justification for this is that there is just simply too much to hear at once in many areas. Multiple scanners fight for your attention and are hard to listen to.

I am seriously thinking that I will patent or register this idea. I think it WILL show up. Maybe it exists on the digital scanners now? I dont know as I dont have anything digital yet. But the scanner manufactuers need something new and inexpensive to give one a competative advantage over each other that does not require extensive engineering.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top