SDS100: SDS100 Firmware 1.04.01M/1.01.05S Open Beta

Status
Not open for further replies.

werinshades

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,674
Location
Chicago , IL
Will do, unfortunately, won't be close enough to site until July 30.

The LCN of 3 (LCN 1 & 2 was found this way)on the control channel was found when searching just a subset of freqs. Is search of groups of 5 or less a valid technique? Maybe the programming of the system was implemented using freqs from both sites? The freq I suspect is the control freq for site 2 is weak compared to the site 1 control freq.
This is a NXDN system correct? I find it unusual that the LCN's are numbered 1...2...3...etc. The two NXDN systems I've run LCN finder on, I always get Channel Numbers (21, 246 etc) and not consecutive LCN numbers like you're trying to figure out. The LCN format you're seeing, I usually see this in MotoTRBO trunking system. LCN is not the same between MotoTRBO and NXDN.
 

Hit_Factor

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
2,001
Location
Saint Joseph, MI
This is a NXDN system correct? I find it unusual that the LCN's are numbered 1...2...3...etc. The two NXDN systems I've run LCN finder on, I always get Channel Numbers (21, 246 etc) and not consecutive LCN numbers like you're trying to figure out. The LCN format you're seeing, I usually see this in MotoTRBO trunking system. LCN is not the same between MotoTRBO and NXDN.
Definitely NXDN (4800), the site's radio tech is a friend. I haven't asked for help because there is no fun in that. He stops by with a radio (comparing to what the SDS100 receives) occasionally to see how I'm doing. I'm learning as I go. So far, my Icom IC-R30 receives more of the traffic, but it doesn't know anything about trunking. I keep seeing progress, so I won't give up yet.
 

wx5uif

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
751
Location
Broken Arrow, OK
Most the NXDN systems here LCNs are numbered 1,2,3, etc.

I've been told by a friend that works on NXDN systems that if a place doesn't have any plans on multiple sites, or just a couple sites that do not use the same frequencies, then they will likely use a standard bandplan that would have numbers such as 401, 164, 323, etc.

However, for multiple sites, they like to just start off on Site 1 LCNs 1,2,3; Site 2 LCNs 4,5,6 and so on. The reasoning is that if the system has two sites that may have overlapping frequencies, then if the CC grants a TG to say channel 401 that radio only has 401 defined once which could only have one RAN assigned to it. Since from what I seen, the RAN follows the site number, so site 3 would have RAN 3. If two sites have LCN 401, the radio wouldn't have the capability to have two RANs programmed.
 

W4ELL

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
624
Location
Maryville, Tennessee
Hello all. Maybe this was mentioned already and I apologize if it was, but could someone point me in the right direction on how to install these firmware updates in Sentinel for my SDS100? I'm not real PC savvy so I have to depend on videos and/or assistance from fellow scanner enthusiasts in here. I already clicked on the link that Upman displayed, but now that they are on my desktop, I don't know how to apply them to sentinel or my SDS100?
I'm a quick learner. Once I've been told or shown how to install something, I can pretty much take care of things on my own after that. Thanks guys.....
-John-
If you aren't computer savvy, I would wait until the official release to do the update. That being said... I posted this earlier in this very thread:
http://forums.radioreference.com/un...-1-04-01m-1-01-05s-open-beta.html#post2968197
 

N6ML

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,083
Location
SF Bay / Delta, CA
Hello all. Maybe this was mentioned already and I apologize if it was, but could someone point me in the right direction on how to install these firmware updates in Sentinel for my SDS100? I'm not real PC savvy so I have to depend on videos and/or assistance from fellow scanner enthusiasts in here. I already clicked on the link that Upman displayed, but now that they are on my desktop, I don't know how to apply them to sentinel or my SDS100?
I'm a quick learner. Once I've been told or shown how to install something, I can pretty much take care of things on my own after that. Thanks guys.....
-John-
When you connect the SDS100 to your PC and select Mass Storage mode, as you would in order to use Sentinel, it appears as a "Drive" in Windows. You should be able to find it under "This PC" (assuming Windows 10). If you're not sure which drive it us, disconnect it, and see which drive disappears. Inside that drive, you should find a "BCDx36HP" folder. With that folder, you should find a "firmware" folder. Place the firmware files (extracted from the ZIP) in the "firmware" folder, then "Eject" the drive (right-click on it in "This PC" and select "Eject"). Then (with the USB cable still connected), hold the power button on the SDS100 for a second or two, and it should start the firmware update.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,302
Location
VA
jonwienke can you post a debug file showing this faster speed please?
Here's a speed test favorite list--500 random frequencies between 380 and 512MHz, organized into 5 departments, labeled "Start/Stop" and "100" - "400". Delete the .txt off the filename after you download it.

Load the favorite list, disconnect your antenna, turn squelch up to 15, and hold on the "500-Channel Speed Test" system. Start your stopwatch as soon as you see "Start/Stop" appear on the screen. Let the scanner cycle through the list 10 times to minimize measurement errors, stopping the timer when you see "Start/Stop" the tenth time. 5000/(scan time) is your scan rate.

SDS100:
73.06s = 68.4 channels/second
This is slower than the previous test results I got a few firmware versions ago. But it's way faster than 25 channels/second.

436HP:
62.69s = 79.8 channels/second
This is very close to previous test results from about a year ago--80channels/second.
 

Attachments

policefreak

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
1,867
Location
Berlin, NJ
Still Not Quite Right

Upon installing this latest firmware version I noticed right away that UHF sensitivity took a hit. Monitoring the county system that I am 7 miles away from nearest tower and approximately 1 mile away from the county line and intended coverage area...I would say that this firmware is way worse on that system. In the same positions as previous firmware using the same Larsen Triband fixed antenna or the portable UHF antenna-misses about 50% of transmissions (Flashes right through them...see video) and other transmissions are garbled or cut out.

Here's a link to the video:

https://youtu.be/PcAMINt1eqo


Error log:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lxiz65tcar1ira5/log0307697.txt?dl=0

System being monitored (Medford Site)
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=1320


Monitoring my local phase 2 P25 system and the big city P25 Phase 1 system I've noticed a lessening of the choppy, garbled and at times unreadable transmissions. It's not perfect but markedly improved.

I'm still noticing overall in my area (which apparently I live in a bowl) and in other areas that there are several systems in the UHF T-Band and 800mhz range that other scanners can monitor, yet this scanner is totally deaf to.
 

policefreak

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
1,867
Location
Berlin, NJ
I should also notice with the latest firmware that RID capture has been improved but not perfect, especially on phase 2. RID alerts activation has also been improved but not perfect, especially on Phase 2.
 

werinshades

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,674
Location
Chicago , IL
Definitely NXDN (4800), the site's radio tech is a friend. I haven't asked for help because there is no fun in that. He stops by with a radio (comparing to what the SDS100 receives) occasionally to see how I'm doing. I'm learning as I go. So far, my Icom IC-R30 receives more of the traffic, but it doesn't know anything about trunking. I keep seeing progress, so I won't give up yet.
Most the NXDN systems here LCNs are numbered 1,2,3, etc.

I've been told by a friend that works on NXDN systems that if a place doesn't have any plans on multiple sites, or just a couple sites that do not use the same frequencies, then they will likely use a standard bandplan that would have numbers such as 401, 164, 323, etc.

However, for multiple sites, they like to just start off on Site 1 LCNs 1,2,3; Site 2 LCNs 4,5,6 and so on. The reasoning is that if the system has two sites that may have overlapping frequencies, then if the CC grants a TG to say channel 401 that radio only has 401 defined once which could only have one RAN assigned to it. Since from what I seen, the RAN follows the site number, so site 3 would have RAN 3. If two sites have LCN 401, the radio wouldn't have the capability to have two RANs programmed.
I've been following along and not commenting, but noticed this and since you're having issues with NXDN, it's a possibility the LCN's are not correct. If you received this information from RRDB maybe start a thread asking additional information from a local user. I have a large NXDN system programmed and it's working perfectly so an issue with the firmware and NXDN would be ruled out.

You mentioned that the previous firmware is trunking NXDN ? I'm suspecting a minor programming issue that you're probably missing. I'd put both site frequencies in and run LCN finder when you're in range. Good luck, ad hope you get this resolved.
 

vikingegfd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
87
Location
upstate NY
Thanx, My last reply to you gave me the idea to download other peoples debug files. These show scan rates of 89 to 55 channels per second on other SDS-100 radios. So I am planning on taking care of this with Uniden based on this defect.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,302
Location
VA
Thanx, My last reply to you gave me the idea to download other peoples debug files. These show scan rates of 89 to 55 channels per second on other SDS-100 radios. So I am planning on taking care of this with Uniden based on this defect.
I'm not sure your debug file test method is valid, given that most of the debug files submitted are for trunked systems, which do not scan the same as conventional. For consistency, you should use my speed test FL.
 

vikingegfd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
87
Location
upstate NY
UPman I assume you're asking me, analog conventional for the scan tests. Normally scanning full mix of trunked p25, aircraft, railroad, and analog conventional channels. Getting ready to run Jon's test file.
 

werinshades

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,674
Location
Chicago , IL
I just discovered this while trying to review some recordings today, UID's are inconsistently being captured on playback but working perfectly during live transmissions.
 

vikingegfd

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
87
Location
upstate NY
Well that was interesting, thanx to jonwienke for his patience, ran his test file then modified my test file into 2 new FL's with the same systems, depts and channels in it. (list contains several different conventional bands)

Results:
Jon's file ran 85 channels per second. All channels in closely related uhf bands?
my file sorted by name in each dept ran 23 channels per second. Skipping back and forth between bands.
my file sorted by frequency in each dept ran 50 channels per second. Much less band skipping.

Upman now understand J's comment on scan speed.
Am now happy and look forward to optimizing Favorites lists to increase scan speed.

Oh and I won't be using debug list to test scan speed anymore.

Anyone want to buy my WS-1040??
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,302
Location
VA
There is additional time required to switch bands when different RF input band filters are involved. So a sorted list that minimizes band changes will scan faster than a random one. My test list only covers a couple bands, but frequencies are in random order to roughly approximate the amount of band changes one would find scanning normal stuff.
 

Ubbe

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
5,659
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
RF input filters switch in microseconds, there's no capacitors involved in the chain that could delay the CPUs signals and there's no feedback available that could tell when the filters have switch succesfully anyhow.

Any delay during scan are from VCO/PLL frequency shifting and there you have a signal that says when the PLL have locked succesfully after a frequency change and it's time to check for a carrier detect as long as the integration time for the squelch has passed. Larger jumps in the PLL frequency will have its filter capacitor slowing down the VCO steering voltage and the PLL locked signal will be delayed and slow down the whole frequency shift.

/Ubbe
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,302
Location
VA
Perhaps you should explain that to UPMan.
 

UPMan

In Memoriam
Uniden Representative
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
13,296
Location
Arlington, TX
UPman I assume you're asking me, analog conventional for the scan tests. Normally scanning full mix of trunked p25, aircraft, railroad, and analog conventional channels. Getting ready to run Jon's test file.

Ok, that answers "what, generally, were you scanning".



What, specifically, were you scanning for the scan tests? Best answered with an hpe file.

EDIT: Nevermind: Reading further found that you determined the answer (which is what I suspected). Scan speed is spec'd based on minimal band jumping.
 

UPMan

In Memoriam
Uniden Representative
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
13,296
Location
Arlington, TX
Upon installing this latest firmware version I noticed right away that UHF sensitivity took a hit. Monitoring the county system that I am 7 miles away from nearest tower and approximately 1 mile away from the county line and intended coverage area...I would say that this firmware is way worse on that system. In the same positions as previous firmware using the same Larsen Triband fixed antenna or the portable UHF antenna-misses about 50% of transmissions (Flashes right through them...see video) and other transmissions are garbled or cut out.

Here's a link to the video:

https://youtu.be/PcAMINt1eqo


Error log:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lxiz65tcar1ira5/log0307697.txt?dl=0

System being monitored (Medford Site)
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=1320


Monitoring my local phase 2 P25 system and the big city P25 Phase 1 system I've noticed a lessening of the choppy, garbled and at times unreadable transmissions. It's not perfect but markedly improved.

I'm still noticing overall in my area (which apparently I live in a bowl) and in other areas that there are several systems in the UHF T-Band and 800mhz range that other scanners can monitor, yet this scanner is totally deaf to.

Try again with END CODE set to either Analog or Ignore and advise if it affects the issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top