Recomendations BCD536HP or Whistler TRX-2 Desktop OR SDS100

[CaptMike2]

So I have been saving my money for a while now and finally have enough saved up to purchase a scanner. After reading through this forum and several websites I have narrowed down my selection to 3 possible scanners.

What I really need is pro's and con's about each scanner to make a decision. Right now I am leaning towards the BCD536HP. However, the information on the SDS100 has peaked my interest.

The biggest issue I am having is making sure any of these scanners will pick up the following location.

Clermont County Trunked

Ohio MARCS-IP: Multi-Agency Radio Communications
Project 25 Phase I All Clermont County agencies use the Ohio MARCS-IP system

All Trunked Radio Systems in Clermont County
System Name Type City
Advance Radio Technology LTR Standard Various
Cincinnati Children's Hospital DMR Conventional Networked Cincinnati
Mobilcomm (Mount Repose) LTR Standard Mount Repose
Mobilcomm (TRBO) DMR Motorola Connect Plus (TRBO) Cincinnati
Ohio MARCS-IP: Multi-Agency Radio Communications Project 25 Phase I Various

Does anyone know if I need any special software purchased and installed to pick up mainly the police frequencies?
DMR Upgrade?
NXDN Upgrade?
Provoice Upgrade?

I know programming software is a must and a subscription to radio reference database.

Short-Term Goals:
Purchase scanner
Program Scanner to my liking
Fine tune settings
Enjoy!

Long-Term Goals:
Hook up the scanner to a laptop for rebroadcasting through broadcastify.
Currently, Clermont County only has fire and EMS broadcast and nothing else. Does anyone know if I can rebroadcast more than 1 bank of channels? Example Updated Fire/ems bank (channels) and Police bank (channels) at the same time? Not all on the same broadcastify link, but 2 separate links.

I really do not plan on using any of these scanners as mobiles but IF the SDS100 has updated and better features and will accomplish my goals I could go with that one.

I truly appreciate any feedback you can provide.
Thanks,
Mike

 

[jonwienke]

MARCS-IP uses a lot of simulcast, and the SDS100 is the only scanner currently available designed to receive simulcast. If you look around, you'll find a lot of user reports indicating excellent results with the SDS100 monitoring MARCS-IP. Other scanners may work perfectly, or may not work at all, depending on your exact location relative to the transmitters. The SDS100 will give you the most consistently good reception.

Given your list of systems, you will need the DMR upgrade to receive the Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Mobilcomm TRBO systems.

 

[phask]

Clermont is simulcast, as suggested - SDS100 for the optimum.



There are a few users in the Ohio from that area.
You do not need a RR sub to update via Sentinel.

 

[lou9155]

bcd536 def......the trx2 is such a waste of $$$

 

[Nasby]

Bottom line is this, since Clermont County is a simulcast system, your best shot at receiving them is with the SDS100.

Any other model scanner would be a crapshoot as to if it would reliably receive the system or not.

 

[CaptMike2]

MARCS-IP uses a lot of simulcasts, and the SDS100 is the only scanner currently available designed to receive simulcast. If you look around, you'll find a lot of user reports indicating excellent results with the SDS100 monitoring MARCS-IP. Other scanners may work perfectly, or may not work at all, depending on your exact location relative to the transmitters. The SDS100 will give you the most consistently good reception.

It appears the SDS100 is leading the technologies so far when it comes to scanners. My exact location is 1.5 by air and 2.5 by ground to the main dispatch tower for Clermont County. The SDS100 price range is really high compared to BCD536HP. Then add the DMR upgrade and programming software. It may be out of my price range.

Given your list of systems, you will need the DMR upgrade to receive the Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Mobilcomm TRBO systems.

If upgrading to the DMR I hoping to do this myself to save me some $$.
Thanks for your Help.
Mike

 

[CaptMike2]

bcd536 def......the trx2 is such a waste of $$$

The TRX2, I have not been impressed with the reviews and comments so far.

 

[CaptMike2]

Clermont is simulcast, as suggested - SDS100 for the optimum.



There are a few users in the Ohio from that area.
You do not need a RR sub to update via Sentinel.

Thanks, I will keep that in mind.

 

[CaptMike2]

Bottom line is this, since Clermont County is a simulcast system, your best shot at receiving them is with the SDS100.

Any other model scanner would be a crapshoot as to if it would reliably receive the system or not.

It would devastate me to spend all that money and have a useless paperweight.
Thanks

 

[wbswetnam]

It would devastate me to spend all that money and have a useless paperweight.
Thanks

I'd cross the Whistler model off of your list immediately. I used to have a TRX-1 and it was completely paralyzed in any simulcast system.

 

[jonwienke]

It appears the SDS100 is leading the technologies so far when it comes to scanners. My exact location is 1.5 by air and 2.5 by ground to the main dispatch tower for Clermont County.

The only scanner that will consistently work well inside a simulcast system is the SDS100. With other scanners, you may get lucky, or it may not work at all.

The SDS100 price range is really high compared to BCD536HP. Then add the DMR upgrade and programming software. It may be out of my price range.

You don't need to buy any software to program the SDS100, Sentinel is free. You can download it and install it and try it out, even if you don't have a scanner.
BCD436HP < UnidenMan4 < TWiki

If upgrading to the DMR I hoping to do this myself to save me some $$.

Buying the upgrade yourself directly from Uniden the best way to go, and the cheapest.

 

[CaptMike2]

Thanks for all the input and advice. It has really helped.

I think I am going to still wait awhile in hopes the rumors are true about an SDS200 or SDS500 desktop version. I would not think Butel would have posted that for no reason if they were not working on software for these. It could have been a mistake posting the information too early then retracted.

Thanks,
Mike