NXDN One Frequency vs Conventional NXDN Programming

[VE2ZPS]

Hi Upman,
Second set of smultaneous Debug Files for today
BCD536: http://scanningteam.net/DebugFiles/190307B_DF_536.zip
SDS200: http://scanningteam.net/DebugFiles/190307B_DF_200.zip

Sincerely,

 

[mrscanner2008]

Please all those who have the OFT problem, send your logs to Uniden to fix the problem. If no one complains, Uniden will not do anything. We must not give up. Do not forget that the series X36 receives the OFT well. unfortunately I do not have an OFT system in my Area to help.

 

[VE2ZPS]

Please all those who have the OFT problem, send your logs to Uniden to fix the problem. If no one complains, Uniden will not do anything. We must not give up. Do not forget that the series X36 receives the OFT well. unfortunately I do not have an OFT system in my Area to help.

Thank you for the support,
The problem is so severe, I dont want to use my SDS100 and SDS200 anymore
If the results of the analysis of my debug files is signal weakness (which would be a problem with the SDS's since I am using exact same antenna set-up) I sell my SDS100 and SDS200 immediately and go back to 436/536.

 

[UPMan]

Hi Upman,
Considering the nature of the services on my Single Frequencies, I was preparing long Debug Files but since I have already heard many transmissions on the 536 that were not captured by the SDS200 (on systems 22.02 and 23.04), I will start with these preliminary Debug Files (more to come)
They are simultaneously extracted from the 536 and 200.

BCD536: http://www.scanningteam.net/DebugFiles/190307DF536.zip
SDS200: http://www.scanningteam.net/DebugFiles/190307DF200.zip

Thank you for your looooong logs.

According to the logs:

1. The received NXDN system is not OFT but NXDN trunk.
It should be programmed as NXDN Trunk System.
SYS ID: 202
SITE ID: 2

2. All signals are very weak.
Most are under -110 dBm.
In this case, depending on the environment, it will vary whether x36 is better or SDS is better.

 

[VE2ZPS]

Thank you for your looooong logs.

According to the logs:
1. The received NXDN system is not OFT but NXDN trunk.
It should be programmed as NXDN Trunk System.
SYS ID: 202
SITE ID: 2
2. All signals are very weak.
Most are under -110 dBm.
In this case, depending on the environment, it will vary whether x36 is better or SDS is better.

Thank you for your analysis and response,
Yes I left one NXDN Trunk (by mistake)
This means that the SDS's sensibility is highly deficient (compare to the x36) so I will get rid of my SDS100 and SDS200 since they are worthless to me (with this extreme weakness)
I didn't buy these 2 Scanners to get less than 50% of the transmissions that I receive with my 436/536.

Thank you for your time,

 

[VE2ZPS]

Hi Upman,

Just out of curiosity, since you are stating that weak signal is the problem
Can you please explain why in this very short video, the 536 picks-up the signal immediately while the SDS200 pass 3 times on the frequency (while there is transmission) without stopping and finally decide to stop the 4th time ?

RSSI -50dBm -60dBm should not be a problem for the SDS ?

 

[RRR]

I notice that, with pretty much the same type of extendable antennas, placed within a foot or so of each other, near a window, my Whistler TRX-1 (Portable) will receive NXDN transmissions from a station approx. 25 miles away, while my Uniden SDS200 will sometimes stop and make a "digital" noise briefly, then resume scanning, or will continue to scan and not stop, while the TRX-1 is passing clean NXDN audio. Both on the same freq. / system.

However, when I brought my SDS200 to the same city the NXDN dept. is at, then it picks up just fine. So that leads me to believe it is obviously a receiving issue with the SDS200.

Fortunately for me, once I finally get my SDS200 custom programmed and GPS'ed like I want it, (I historically set the GPS on my BCD996P2's to unlock about 3 or 4 miles on approach, as well as lockout while departing the next county line/city limit I am approaching/leaving, and plan to do the same with my SDS200), so hopefully, with an external mobile antenna, the SDS200 will receive NXDN well enough for what I need it for when I put it in my vehicle.

Regardless, I have high hopes a lot of this stuff will be remedied soon, there are always "growing pains" and adjustments and such on almost every new similar electronic device.

However, somewhat concerning are comments from the company's representative here that gives the impression he is brushing off or side-stepping concerns of the SDS200 that have been verified and posted by others. I could be taking it the wrong way, as it is sometimes difficult to discern someone's demeanor over written statements/postings. But currently, I am satisfied with mine, and hope to see more improvements and features as they evolve.

 

[werinshades]

I notice that, with pretty much the same type of extendable antennas, placed within a foot or so of each other, near a window, my Whistler TRX-1 (Portable) will receive NXDN transmissions from a station approx. 25 miles away, while my Uniden SDS200 will sometimes stop and make a "digital" noise briefly, then resume scanning, or will continue to scan and not stop, while the TRX-1 is passing clean NXDN audio. Both on the same freq. / system.

However, when I brought my SDS200 to the same city the NXDN dept. is at, then it picks up just fine. So that leads me to believe it is obviously a receiving issue with the SDS200.

Fortunately for me, once I finally get my SDS200 custom programmed and GPS'ed like I want it, (I historically set the GPS on my BCD996P2's to unlock about 3 or 4 miles on approach, as well as lockout while departing the next county line/city limit I am approaching/leaving, and plan to do the same with my SDS200), so hopefully, with an external mobile antenna, the SDS200 will receive NXDN well enough for what I need it for when I put it in my vehicle.

Regardless, I have high hopes a lot of this stuff will be remedied soon, there are always "growing pains" and adjustments and such on almost every new similar electronic device.

However, somewhat concerning are comments from the company's representative here that gives the impression he is brushing off or side-stepping concerns of the SDS200 that have been verified and posted by others. I could be taking it the wrong way, as it is sometimes difficult to discern someone's demeanor over written statements/postings. But currently, I am satisfied with mine, and hope to see more improvements and features as they evolve.

While the SDS's excel on stronger signals, it doesn't perform as well on "marginal" signals that the 536 has in the past received is what we've discovered. In my case, I still am using the 536 for certain systems that I can't on the SDS200. Despite filter experimentation, modulation changes nothing has changed. I have a One Frequency NXDN system that's 20 watts and a mile away that engineering reported was too weak via a debug file. However the same system run simultaneously on my 536 as a debug file and was submitted for comparison purposes that I don't think was reviewed. Some here depend heavily on those marginal signals to receive as well as their previous model scanners as it's the primary source of listening. Might have to take my SDS100 out and park next to the rental garage and run a debug file again.

 

[VE2ZPS]

However, somewhat concerning are comments from the company's representative here that gives the impression he is brushing off or side-stepping concerns of the SDS200 that have been verified and posted by others. I could be taking it the wrong way, as it is sometimes difficult to discern someone's demeanor over written statements/postings. But currently, I am satisfied with mine, and hope to see more improvements and features as they evolve.

Hi RRR,
You are so right; the first step into fixing something is to admit there is a problem.
In my case, I am missing more than 50% of the transmissions so easily captured by my 436/536 so telling me that this is a weak signal problem is unacceptable. (it's like telling me get used to it, this is normal and there is no problem)
I haven't used my SDS100 and SDS200 for the past few days because I know I am missing so much; they are simply not reliable.

I have tried to contribute by providing many reports, debug files and "playing" with the filter mode (even if I thing this is ridiculous)
If the answer from the Representative would have been; "... we are aware and we are working on it ..." I would have some hope.
But the answers I received means these Scanners are highly deficients and you have to live with the problem.

They miss over 50% of the One Frequency (DMR/NXDN) and on the analog side the audio is terrible and forget weak signal.
I have been in this Hobby for over 40 years (I did not start yesterday), I have (or had) probably all the Uniden models and this is the worst product I have seen so much so that I dont use them anymore.

This is the first time I participate so much to a Thread on Radioreference since I am a Member (I usually never complain but this makes no sense).
I didn't pay simply for 2 nice displays; I paid first and foremost for the audio !

 

[mrscanner2008]

@ Upman

more logs for OFT bug. DMR one Frequency, same antenna (SDS200 and 536hp). its not a weak signal problem because I can receive this system with my 436 without antenna !
dropbox oft bug logs

 

[mrscanner2008]

note for the above logs: I had 20 tx on the 536 (and 436 without antenna) and nothing on the SDS200.

 

[UPMan]

Hi Upman,

Just out of curiosity, since you are stating that weak signal is the problem
Can you please explain why in this very short video, the 536 picks-up the signal immediately while the SDS200 pass 3 times on the frequency (while there is transmission) without stopping and finally decide to stop the 4th time ?

RSSI -50dBm -60dBm should not be a problem for the SDS ?

The op code that is transmitted that identifies the signal as DMR OFT does not occur frequently, so it can take some time to detect them, depending on timing. As a trial to see what would improve this:

1. Increase the hold time.
2. Reduce the number of other things that are being scanned.
3. Change the RF filter to wide.
4. Change the modulation to FM.

 

[mrscanner2008]

The op code that is transmitted that identifies the signal as DMR OFT does not occur frequently, so it can take some time to detect them, depending on timing. As a trial to see what would improve this:

1. Increase the hold time.
2. Reduce the number of other things that are being scanned.
3. Change the RF filter to wide.
4. Change the modulation to FM.

1. Increase the hold time. new log tomorrow with hold time from 2 sec to 4sec
2. Reduce the number of other things that are being scanned. only OFT systems is scanned. nothing else
3. Change the RF filter to wide. change filter from normal to wide normal. new log tomorrow.
4. Change the modulation to FM. Already set to FM.

logs SDS200

logs 536hp

 

[RRR]

If "reducing the number of other things scanned" is a solution, then a NX-series radio would probably be the answer, rather than restrict what all we scan with the SDS200.

Geesh, the display is great, but, a TRX for DMR, a G4 for simulcast, and a NXDN radio for NXDN, and you will spend about the same money, and get near perfect signal on all of them.

Again, I'm hoping there is a fix in the works, and not "this is how it is"...

 

[werinshades]

If "reducing the number of other things scanned" is a solution, then a NX-series radio would probably be the answer, rather than restrict what all we scan with the SDS200.

Geesh, the display is great, but, a TRX for DMR, a G4 for simulcast, and a NXDN radio for NXDN, and you will spend about the same money, and get near perfect signal on all of them.

Again, I'm hoping there is a fix in the works, and not "this is how it is"...

UPMan said "as a trial" which is probably a response from the engineers and might be writing new code for a future firmware update.

 

[VE2ZPS]

UPMan said "as a trial" which is probably a response from the engineers and might be writing new code for a future firmware update.

The 436 and 536 are working fine with One Frequency (DMR or NXDN) why the engineers dont use the code (or whatever) of the 536 as a starting point instead of trying to reinvent the wheel ?
Why they didn't start with something that works and proven to be efficient when building the SDS ?

 

[werinshades]

The 436 and 536 are working fine with One Frequency (DMR or NXDN) why the engineers dont use the code (or whatever) of the 536 as a starting point instead of trying to reinvent the wheel ?
Why they didn't start with something that works when building the SDS ?

I'm with you on this, but I also know it's two different types of technology. Fortunately we can still both listen on another scanner but yes I'd like my SDS scanners to perform equally well. I'm speculating on the request is all.

 

[mrscanner2008]

@UPMan

1. Increase the hold time. new log with hold time from 2 sec to 4sec
2. Reduce the number of other things that are being scanned. only OFT systems is scanned. nothing else
3. Change the RF filter to wide. change filter to wide normal.
4. Change the modulation to FM. Already set to FM.

SDS200 logs
BCD536hp logs

 

[UPMan]

Thank you for debug logs.

But if a log is very long, it is difficult to find issues.
These are over 300 Mbytes. And there are over 20 channels being scanned.

Focus on the issue channel, I would like to log before and after the issue occurrence.

This is a rough check, but it seems to be receiving enough though it is a weak signal level.

What is RSSI and NOISE displayed on the issue channel?

 

[mrscanner2008]

hank you for debug logs.

But if a log is very long, it is difficult to find issues.
These are over 300 Mbytes. And there are over 20 channels being scanned.

Focus on the issue channel, I would like to log before and after the issue occurrence.

This is a rough check, but it seems to be receiving enough though it is a weak signal level.

What is RSSI and NOISE displayed on the issue channel?

The issue occured on all OFT channels.
The signal level is not weak because I can received OFT channels with my 436hp without antenna.
I will check tonight for RSSI and NOISE .