Programming dummy towers, MPSCS

[hanlonmi06]

I stumbled across a tip where someone described programming a "dummy tower" into the site list on something like the MPSCS. I tried this the other day and it actually seemed to make an improvement of my scanning reception on this system.

Some background: I travel often between Wayne, Washtenaw and Monroe counties using a GRE PSR800/WS1080, and have accepted my simulcast fate. I have a mix of the simulcast sites and stand alone like Northville. The radio is hooked to a 1/4 wave NMO mount that yes, I drilled the damn hole smack dab on top of the truck cab. Its fed through a scanner masters BPF-800-EN and this radio essentially only scans MPSCS.

In the scanner programming, I added the dummy towers "in between" all of the towers set up in the site list, using 1300mhz as a tower frequency, and changed nothing else.

My question is, why did this programming change seem to positively impact this arrangement?

Using my highly calibrated RF sniffing ears, it was as if I added a NOS sticker to my back window and got 20 extra HP. The reception was obviously different, seemingly getting more of the transmissions. I still get simulcast issues, but it does seem to work better.

 

[rivardj]

I stumbled across a tip where someone described programming a "dummy tower" into the site list on something like the MPSCS. I tried this the other day and it actually seemed to make an improvement of my scanning reception on this system.

Some background: I travel often between Wayne, Washtenaw and Monroe counties using a GRE PSR800/WS1080, and have accepted my simulcast fate. I have a mix of the simulcast sites and stand alone like Northville. The radio is hooked to a 1/4 wave NMO mount that yes, I drilled the damn hole smack dab on top of the truck cab. Its fed through a scanner masters BPF-800-EN and this radio essentially only scans MPSCS.

In the scanner programming, I added the dummy towers "in between" all of the towers set up in the site list, using 1300mhz as a tower frequency, and changed nothing else.

My question is, why did this programming change seem to positively impact this arrangement?

Using my highly calibrated RF sniffing ears, it was as if I added a NOS sticker to my back window and got 20 extra HP. The reception was obviously different, seemingly getting more of the transmissions. I still get simulcast issues, but it does seem to work better.

April fools is on April 1st not August 1st.

 

[hanlonmi06]

Perhaps the last comment was facetious, but this isn't a joke posting. This actually seemed to make enough of a difference to notice a change in the scanning and I am curious as to why that may be. Its entirely possible that there is no difference and my perceptions are inaccurate. I have no scientific way to test this.

I figured this space would be the best option to solicit some ideas. Perhaps I am mistaken.

 

[dmchalmers]

Perhaps the last comment was facetious, but this isn't a joke posting. This actually seemed to make enough of a difference to notice a change in the scanning and I am curious as to why that may be. Its entirely possible that there is no difference and my perceptions are inaccurate. I have no scientific way to test this.

I figured this space would be the best option to solicit some ideas. Perhaps I am mistaken.

I've said it befor this site is all for the experts an not for the beginners!

 

[hanlonmi06]

Sorry to drag this back up, but I found the snippet of text that I had in my notes that prompted all this. It is not my intention to plagiarize anything here so if I'm copying something here that I shouldn't, let me know, but this was what I was trying to understand if there was validity to it or not:

Hints and Tips
If you need to trunk a multi site system (particularly if you are mobile, and moving from the coverage from one site (a) to the next (b), programming a dummy channel (c) will allow the scanner to move to another site(a,b,d) better during inactivity from the current site(a). The following illustrates the programming:

ex. Site Frequency
(a) Site001 868.17500
(c) Dummy 1300.00000
(b) Site002 868.22500
(e) Dummy 13000.00000
(d) Site003 866.65000
The dummy frequency (e) could be any valid frequency that is unused in your area (free of signal). Programming a used channel (c), in this position, could interfere with normal trunking. This tip works with the PRO-96 and 2096. (Thanks to user "fmon" for the tip and suggestion for the writeup) and could possibly work for other makes & models

....is there any validity to this?

 

[KD8FSJ]

Sorry to drag this back up, but I found the snippet of text that I had in my notes that prompted all this. It is not my intention to plagiarize anything here so if I'm copying something here that I shouldn't, let me know, but this was what I was trying to understand if there was validity to it or not:

Hints and Tips
If you need to trunk a multi site system (particularly if you are mobile, and moving from the coverage from one site (a) to the next (b), programming a dummy channel (c) will allow the scanner to move to another site(a,b,d) better during inactivity from the current site(a). The following illustrates the programming:

ex. Site Frequency
(a) Site001 868.17500
(c) Dummy 1300.00000
(b) Site002 868.22500
(e) Dummy 13000.00000
(d) Site003 866.65000
The dummy frequency (e) could be any valid frequency that is unused in your area (free of signal). Programming a used channel (c), in this position, could interfere with normal trunking. This tip works with the PRO-96 and 2096. (Thanks to user "fmon" for the tip and suggestion for the writeup) and could possibly work for other makes & models

....is there any validity to this?

I used to do this using 2 frequencies 155.3700 & 155.8650 then a different site. This seemed to work. I can't remember, but I thought I saw you were not supposed to use something with a PL?? I can't remember if that's accurate, it's been awhile.

 

[hanlonmi06]

That's interesting. 155.37 is definitely still in use. I don't recall catching anything on 155.865 but I do have it in the lists.

I get that this whole thing sounds nuts. Bottom line I am getting more enjoyment out of my setup, so that is enough for me right now. Given that there were two models of radios specifically sited as benefiting from the "hack" it caught my interest.

If there is anyone else running a Whistler/GRE product with a mix of stand alone sites, simulcast sites, and regularly travels between 4-6 major metropolitan counties, I'd love to know what you have found to work best.

 

[KD8FSJ]

I don't recall catching anything on 155.865 but I do have it in the lists.

I haven't heard traffic on that in awhile either. That's just what I was using at the time.