New UniTrunker release

[SCPD]

This system comes up as conventional every time I start the program,

By "conventional", do you mean "Motorola" ?

and I have to switch it to P25, which then creates a new system.

Don't do that.

You're monitoring a Motorola system. It may use P25 for the voice channels - but the control channel is Motorola.

I tried entering 0 for the LCNs that wouldn't display, but they stayed as 0.0000.

Makes perfect sense to me. If the frequencies are zero then the bandplan logic has a chance to change them.

Can you post screenshots of the Channels and Bandplan tabs - or - post a copy of your XML file?

 

[Jose_Pointero]

So, can I use this program to listen using an AR-8000 receiver? I've been trying and it will connect to the 8000, but I can't figure out how to get it to tune. There have been a couple of times where a call appears, I click the "Listen" box, and then the program crashes. Been messing with it for an hour and can't figure it out.

My setup is a Pro-433 with disc. tap for "Signal" and AR-8000 on COM1 for "Control".

 

[SCPD]

Hi Jose;

So, can I use this program to listen using an AR-8000 receiver?

The "readme.html" file included with the program states:

Unitrunker currently does not support voice following. This critical feature will become available at a later date.

Voice following is currently being tested in preparation for the next release.

 

[Jose_Pointero]

Ah, gotcha. Definitely looking forward to that next release, then Please don't forget about us AOR users like everyone else does! Thanks for all your work on this software.

 

[mtindor]

Rick,

Any chance you could make it a choice to disable whatever the logic is that determines EDACS sites? You know on the old Unitrunker you could scan a multisite system with a delay/dwell and it would actually identify the sites from the stored data even if it was only on the CC for two seconds.

On the new Unitrunker, because of the way you have the logic now, if you scan a multisite system with Unitrunker on (at least EDACS multisite), it just pops up the limbo windows and wants you to enter the freqs. Obviously in the old version it could determine enough. I know you are trying to make it "smarter" so that you can monitor multiple EDACS sites with the same system id and/or site ID and not have it dump data from different systems into the same database/file. But, for instance, in my case there are no EDACS sites in the area except the many AEP EDACS sites that are part of one system. It'd be nice if I could run the new Unitrunker, set the scanner to scan multiple sites, and have it take whatever data it collects from the control channel of the control channels during the 2 second dwell, and log that information as coming from particular sites within that system.

Just a question/suggestion...

mike

 

[SCPD]

Any chance you could make it a choice to disable whatever the logic is that determines EDACS sites? You know on the old Unitrunker you could scan a multisite system with a delay/dwell and it would actually identify the sites from the stored data even if it was only on the CC for two seconds.

It would - most of the time. Repeated walking through a short list of sites would eventually cause pollution of your data. You'd log new talkgroup 123 for system A only to discover it really belonged on system B. I'm trying to be very conservative with data accuracy (and I see you clearly understand that).

On the new Unitrunker, because of the way you have the logic now, if you scan a multisite system with Unitrunker on (at least EDACS multisite), it just pops up the limbo windows and wants you to enter the freqs. Obviously in the old version it could determine enough.

The old program treats the site number as a system ID - which is wrong. It's a crude hack at best.

But, for instance, in my case there are no EDACS sites in the area except the many AEP EDACS sites that are part of one system. It'd be nice if I could run the new Unitrunker, set the scanner to scan multiple sites, and have it take whatever data it collects from the control channel of the control channels during the 2 second dwell, and log that information as coming from particular sites within that system.

The only reason for setting the signal receiver to "scan" is to chase the control channel for a single site.

For a "signal" only receiver - I don't have a neat, clean way to do what you're asking. All it takes is one mistake. Grab the tuning knob on the receiver (or select a control channel from the scanner's memory) and - bam - you've injected junk into otherwise perfect system data. Talkgroup data would be okay (assuming you scan sites belonging to the same system) but your channels would be toast.

For a signal + control radio like the PSR-500 I can do this by pulling the active control channel frequency from the radio (instead of asking you to type it in). The site number, control channel LCN and frequency are sufficient to uniquely identify a site (for a given geographic area). I can use this to eliminate manual intervention - but scanning multiple sites remains problematic from a coherent decoding perspective.

Unitrunker does track multiple systems simultaneously. One work-around is to throw more radio hardware at the problem. You don't need to buy more $500 radios - dig up one of your older scanners (like the PRO-90); purchase a low end analog only conventional model on clearance. Add a second or third radio to provide signal information to continuously monitor multiple control channels (and not just a time slice of each one taken in turn).

One way to accomplish what you ask is to have Unitrunker control the scanning operation (so it would know what system it was monitoring). That's a feature I can pursue further down the road from where I'm at now.

 

[mtindor]

Rather than quoting everything, I concede. You've talked me out of trying to convince you to do something the wrong way just to suit me You know I just want my cake and eat it too.

I have been thinking long and hard about multiple scanners. It's not so much the cost. As you pointed out, all that is needed is a bunch of old receivers capable of receiving the 800 mhz signals. My problem is how to get all the audio from a dozen receivers into one computer. Either the radios are $500 PSRs and I have everything strung off of a USB hub [which I would never do since I'm not made of money], or I need one or more audio devices installed in the computer that will take 'n' number of audio inputs.

I have a Delta 44 (which I bought to initially test this) but realized that there is no amplification of the audio signal through it since it isn't a sound card. Most of my receivers wouldn't push enough audio into the delta-44 to be usable by an application. Plus even with four inputs (i know m-audio makes ones with more), you don't get four distinct audio devices to work with in Windows but instead get two stereo devices.

I like your idea of pulling the CC from the PC/IF on the PSR500/600. I realize it's just a band-aid for what I want to do and that realistically I need to have consistent data input from each site for my endeavor to be as fruitful as possible. But just for the sake of convenience, I'm sure any users who use the PC/IF would be so very very happy if you were to do that

If you've got any suggestions that I've overlooked to feed a dozen receiver signals into one computer, I'd be interested in hearing them.

mike

 

[SCPD]

You know I just want my cake and eat it too.

The health department is preventing my from serving that cake. Sorry, I had to throw it out.

If you've got any suggestions that I've overlooked to feed a dozen receiver signals into one computer, I'd be interested in hearing them.

Just one - stereo decoding. Unitrunker supports this. Configure one receiver to decode from the left channel - the other signal receiver decodes from the right channel. That cuts your problem in half. You can add five USB sound adapters instead of eleven to get a total of 12 audio inputs. If the adapter supports both stereo line input and stereo microphone input - you may be able to get four receivers working on one adapter.

 

[kevins669]

If the adapter supports both stereo line input and stereo microphone input - you may be able to get four receivers working on one adapter.

Rick, (or anyone else) know where to get a USB stereo LINE-IN card cheap? I bought a $5 thumb-drive size one on ebay, and it works great... but only MIC in , which is mono. But for streaming in an emergency, I want to have about 4 stereo channels... All the ones with a line-in seem to be a lot bigger (on a dongle/with a cable) and much more expensive than $5.

Any recommendations?

Thanks,

-- Kevin