-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
Preamp Question
- Thread starter renze8173
- Start date
- Status
What frequency range and do you want it for RX only?
- Joined
- May 2, 2008
- Messages
- 51
I have a Diamond Discone antenna on top of a 45' tower with LMR-400 coax cable. The length of the coax cable is 90' before it "Ts" into two seperate coax cables for my BCT15's that are both 30' long that totals 150'. I know that the LMR-400 will support the VHF high range (which I mostly scan) at that lenght, but the "T" reduces the dB conciderably. I also ran 12' of RG58 that connects to each of the 30' LMR400 that I ran in the walls of my shop and office due to the fact that it's more flexable and easier to work with (I know that it sounds confusing). My thoughts are that all of those connectors are killing the dB, but that is the only way I could make it happen with the budget I had.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Sounds like only one leg of the split runs to your office and the other to the shop. Only on leg is used at a time as you move you and the radio from one area to the other. Maybe??? replace the "T" with a remote control coaxial switch will improve the signal. The switch will have some insertion loss but likely less than the impact of the unused leg is having. I know the RG58 is only 12 feet, but something with better high frequency response will help too if used to replace the RG58.
Your comment that the "T" reduces the db suggests you have taken it out and tried a straight run antenna to radio. While the "T" has insertion loss in itself you also eliminated what was connected to the other part of the "T". Did you try disconnecting the unused leg at the "T" to see if that improved the signal to the radio?
Your comment that the "T" reduces the db suggests you have taken it out and tried a straight run antenna to radio. While the "T" has insertion loss in itself you also eliminated what was connected to the other part of the "T". Did you try disconnecting the unused leg at the "T" to see if that improved the signal to the radio?
- Joined
- May 2, 2008
- Messages
- 51
No I haven't tried that becouse I didn't think that it would make much difference, but maybe it will. I'm O.K. with the reception, but I think that it can be better becouse of the type of antenna, height of the antenna, the LMR-400, and I have no restrictions nearby. I think that a preamp will help me out since the set-up that I have is pretty good besides the "T" and the axtra connectors. I will be honost and admit that I haven't been in the game long so any suggestions will be appreciated.
From your description and material used you have a really nice setup and have put some dollars into it. Any system of radio-transmission line-antenna is only as good as the weakest link. If the T is conveniently located you can easily change the configuration and see how it effects the reception of known weak signals, comparing one configuration against the other. If you find that eliminating the unused leg helps reception then a coaxial switch, manual or remotely controlled because of location would likely be better than a preamp to make up the loss of signal. Preamps have their own problems of overload on strong nearby signals and amplifying the noise as well as the target signal. They can help, but usually have narrow niche setups that they work well in.
I think your weakest link is the T followed by the RG58. I don't think the change to something other than RG58 will be significant. However, its easy to change and might help more than expected. Arm-chair theory vs. hands-on work can yield unexpected positive results.
You are happy with the current reception, but once you squeeze out more performance and pickup systems you have not heard before you will look back and realize the reception was not as good as you thought.
Good luck with your efforts.
Mike
Last edited:
- Status
