PRS-500 is missing uhf-ultra public safety search..

[rdale]

Yes it's important to the "vast majority of the country" if you count population centers ie: buyers

Again... This "missing feature" is not at all even REMOTELY important to a majority, let alone a significant minority, of buyers - regardless of how you break it down.

 

[kikito]

Just to "refresh" the facts and the original complain before it gets drowned by the arguments: The T-Band is not missing from this scanner, is just not included as a preset search. So technically you can make your own and link it to the scan cycle.

Now to add to speculation, it's always possible the T-Band could be added to the presets with a future firmware update. Who knows....

 

[yaesumofo]

My point was that this would be a much appreciated preset in the LA area.
Also very important if you just visit LA even more so for visitors who need it to find LAPD frequencies.

For what it is worth there are a hellofa lot of scanner users in LA.
A Local radio store reports selling a great deal of BC396's (preprogrammed) to a wide variety of people. Many of whom you wouldn't expect to be radio scanner enthousists.
Apparently to a man they are very interested in making sure that Certain Local agencys are programmed into the radio LAPD is amoung them.
This market segment may be larger than we would all care to admit. Nonetheless when large numbers of people are willing to pay a premium price for a radio which is preprogrammed..Payment in cash....From retailer point of view it is customers like these who buy these radios. Not just here in LA either.
The GRE radio will enjoy the same demand. Having the complete UHF frequcency band available as a preprogrammed search will definatly be a plus.

BTW there does seem to be some tweaking of the channels the LAPD uses.
I am not one of those people who believe that all of the scanner books show the exact and complete and precise LAPD Radio setup.
I have always believed that there were some channels withheld due to sensitive information possible being transmitted in the clear.
Stakeouts, juvenile narcotics may all have encrypted channels to themselves. I am somewhat sure there are others as well which are not in the books and databases.
Having a direct search range would be a big help to both radio tourists and locals alike all around the country.


I have no doubt this is an easy fix. If GRE pays any attention the will pick up on this.
I hope there is not some techncal issue which will prevent this FIX from happening.

Yaesumofo

It's not just Los Angeles.

T-Band is used all over the country in various areas.

It's a big gap in features.

 

[KMA367]

A Local radio store reports selling a great deal of BC396's (preprogrammed) to a wide variety of people. Many of whom you wouldn't expect to be radio scanner enthousists.

But who wouldn't one expect to be scanner enthusiasts? Cops? Crooks? Kids? Senior citizens? Just about anyone's liable to be a scanner listener, it seems to me.

BTW there does seem to be some tweaking of the channels the LAPD uses.
I am not one of those people who believe that all of the scanner books show the exact and complete and precise LAPD Radio setup.
I have always believed that there were some channels withheld due to sensitive information possible being transmitted in the clear.

Yes, it's really no secret that LAPD uses unlicensed frequencies for some specialized activities, some of them totally in compliance with the 47 USC 90.20(f)(5) unlicensed, low-power provision. They've also been known to use US Govt and military (non-FCC-administered) frequencies and even totally non-standard frequencies outside the typical 2-way ranges. Most of those wouldn't be covered by plugging the T-band "gap" anyway.

 

[n4jri]

It's also important to remember that service searches can be pretty cumbersome in urban areas. A UHF service search here in Richmond would be mostly masked data going to MDT's. There is also an awful lot of frequency borrowing from other services which would go undetected in a service search.

For me, their purpose has always been to see what general neighborhoods of frequencies to look in. And yes, having a T-Band segment (or multiple separate segments) would be welcome. But I would think that a band search would do just fine for most folks who already know which T-Band they're in.

If the Virginia State Police were sought in a service search, they might not show up. Their dispatch frequencies were borrowed from the Highway Maintenance radio service. Only their tac channels and repeater inputs came from the the police radio service. (forgive this old terminology, but it is a 1974 system)

Given the searching power of the radio it still seems like a non-issue to me.

73/Allen (N4JRI)

 

[KMA367]

Good points, Allen, especially

If the Virginia State Police were sought in a service search, they might not show up. Their dispatch frequencies were borrowed from the Highway Maintenance radio service. Only their tac channels and repeater inputs came from the the police radio service. (forgive this old terminology, but it is a 1974 system)

Gone are those days (since when, early 90s?) when the different public-safety services each had their own frequencies - PF, PP, PH, PL, PS, PM - and they all pretty much kept to their allocated band segments? Now all are more or less swept together and mixed up in the "PW" service. Same with business/industry and the IB, IF, IM, IP, IS, etc., and the transportation groups with LR, LX, LA, LJ... And besides that, there seems to be even more borrowing today than ever. In Calif there are Part 22 frequencies now used for police, a number of theoretically "railroad" frequencies also used by law agencies, and so on.

Given the searching power of the radio it still seems like a non-issue to me.

73/Allen (N4JRI)

I tend to agree, especially with the chain-search capabilities. I've almost never used my scanners' search features anyway, but preferred to set up my own.

But everyone's in different places and everyone has their own preferences, which would seem to me to be a plus for the PRS-500, rather than a minus.

 

[trooperdude]

Gone are those days (since when, early 90s?) when the different public-safety services each had their own frequencies - PF, PP, PH, PL, PS, PM - and they all pretty much kept to their allocated band segments? Now all are more or less swept together and mixed up in the "PW" service. Same with business/industry and the IB, IF, IM, IP, IS, etc., and the transportation groups with LR, LX, LA, LJ...

And don't forget some marine frequencies inland are now assigned to PS. Placer County CA is developing a trunk system on frequencies "purchased" from a marine ship-shore service.

There is no "public safety" band anymore.

 

[proquist96]

Yeah, the search range 470-512 would be very nice where i am. pro96 doesn't have it either. All the action is in that range. T-band (Turmoil Band).

 

[walter900]

It's going to be very interesting to see what GRE has planned (in terms of adding features) for the PSR-500's first firmware flash!! I would think that would give us a good indication as to how well GRE is going to support it, as well as, how well they are listening to users request.

 

[rdale]

It will.

 

[n1das]

It's use is limited geographically by the rules (§ 90.303) to only urbanized areas as specified in the rules. Those areas are as follows:

Boston, MA
Chicago, IL
Cleveland, OH
Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
Detroit, MI
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
Miami, FL
New York/NE NJ
Philadelphia, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
San Francisco/Oakland, CA
Washington, DC/MD/VA​

So although the "T" band may be important in those limited areas, it is not important to the vast majority of the country.

There's another issue to consider. The frequency allocations of the T-band segment(s) are different in the metro areas where T-band is used. For example, the Boston area's usage is different from the NYC/NE NJ area's usage, and Los Angeles' usage is also completely different, etc. Plus there is some overlap in the allocations among different areas. For example, Boston area uses 470-476MHz and 482-488MHz segments and another area may use 470-476MHz but the freq allocation in that segment may be different from the Boston area's allocation. What's allocated for public safety usage in one area may be used by businesses in others and vice versa. When you use a pre-programmed search range to find local PD and FD activity in a different area using the same 470-476MHz segment, you want to hear the PD and FD activity and NOT the local landscaping business and towtruck operators on a community repeater.

To have an up to date pre-programmed T-band service search range means that an individual search range is needed for each metro area that uses any T-band freqs. The size and complexity of the problem means that the whole country's T-band usage can't be covered accurately in a single pre-programmed search range.

I'm not surprised GRE left the UHF-T band out as a pre-prgrammed service search range. I'll work around it like I've done in the past by programming search ranges for T-band segments that are used in my area.

 

[KC9NEG]

Well said.

Todd/Indy

 

[Gilligan]

I wouldn't actually have a use for this T-band in the public safety search right now, but I surely would want it when I'm traveling thru areas that use it heavily. I think the whole ideas is that for the small amount of effort it would take to add the feature -- it would please a respectable number of people. Or another way of putting it is that excluding it will make it very inconvenient for a respectable number of people. And some of these folks are 80 years old with a difficulty in understanding SCAN and HOLD, let alone how to set up linked searches and such. So wouldn't it be in the best interest of the scanning community to just go ahead and add it? It almost looks like an oversight to me, or just something somebody dropped without giving it much thought...

 

[rdale]

Gilligan - show me one 80 year old that 1) requires a T-Band preprogrammed search. If you can find that one person, then 2) tell me why he can't figure out how to do it with the search function.

It was explained above why it's not preset in the radio. You can emulate that function very easily with the scanner if you need it.

 

[diskmonger]

This UHF T-BAND thread is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on Radio Reference. If it is such a big deal to you don't buy the radio. Heaven forbid having to program this search region into the radio - I guess that is just way too much work.

The radio isn't even out yet and people find things to complain about

 

[ButchGone]

"The radio isn't even out yet and people find things to complain about"

Cheers! I often wonder when reading these threads that there are some who expect the performance of a $5,000 commericial radio (like XTS 5000) for a riduculously low price and want every imaginable feature along with 5.1 surround sound digital audio quality! Oh yes, throw in some batteries that last 48 hours per charge and a discreet device to serve the "personal needs" of the user with vise grip-like precision!
Gimmie gimmie gimmie!
BG..

 

[walter900]

cheers troll!

Adding UHF 470-512 is not a un-reasonable request.. And we know that GRE can easily add 470-512 via firmware, just as easily as they can add 450-460 via firmware.. So, your idea of a 5,000 commercial radio, and gimmie gimmie gimmie name calling sounds rediculous troll. Folks have been asking for request for all brands of scanners, and that will never stop.. How do you think the Uniden 396 got the rough edges out.. Uniden listened to owners feedback, and released numerous firmware improvements at owners request to make for a better radio.. Sure... we have not seen this scanner yet, but most have read the manual, and also, other GRE scanners like the pro-97 are known for not having the 470-512 in service search.. So we know what to expect already. Folks here like GRE, want to purchase GRE, and want to provide feedback that will improve upon there great product.

 

[WayneH]

The bottom line is, it's not reasonable to add that range to search when, if you actually look at 90.303, there are varying ranges to search based on the geographic area. I personally would not want to scan the 470s or the 500s when they aren't even applicable to my area (San Fran, CA), plus they would hinder my search more than often.

They're a niche range. It's quite understandable that they aren't included.

 

[rdale]

Adding UHF 470-512 is not a un-reasonable request.

It is if you have any knowledge of scanners, FCC band allocations, and the ability to read this very thread to see why...

And even if you do have all of the above, you still have the right to constantly whine about it here!

 

[loumaag]

There seems to be a misunderstanding developing here and although there has been some discussion on both sides of the fence, let's consider some realities.

First, let's remember we are talking about a consumer level, hobbyist scanner.

• A pre-programmed search band for the T-Band would be a search used only in limited geographic areas, and even in those areas where T-Band is used by PS, it would be handicapped by all those silly TV stations that are in the segments of the band not used by PS in your area.
• If the T-Band was included in any pre-programmed public safety search area (you know, where it says your searching the known "Police", "Fire", etc. frequencies) then *most* people would not use that search at all since they would get all the TV signals in the T-Band.
• For those people who happen to live in one of the limited geographical areas that uses some segment of the T-Band for PS (instead of TV channels (T-Band -- TV; get it)) then the scanner allows you to set up that "custom" spectrum search for the segment appropriate to your area so that you can avoid the rest of the T-Band where TV signals still exist.

And that, folks, is why the band is not included in the newer scanners that allow for custom searches to be set up.