SDS100/SDS200: SDS100 Firmware 1.05.00M/1.01.05S Open Beta

[SCPD]

It could be a combination of things, I still can't wrap my head around people that constantly need to take a crap on the radio SMH


Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
XPR7550 - SDS100

If you are replying to me my First impression was actually really good on day one...


see this post

http://forums.radioreference.com/un...100-distance-improvement-2.html#post29752901s

WOW.. all i can say is this brings in all the distant analog channels that even the 996p2 was uninteligable (analog)

800 type II analog no go but system is 50 miles away....

P25 multicast/simulcast on VHF awesome...

Makes 436 996p2 look like trash to be honest and i thought the 996p2 had a hot receive...

THANKS PAUL and everyone from Uniden... all i can say is WOW

so worth it i bought nxdn proscan and dmr upgrades... Have some dmr here but not much... Want to say I noticed like a 5 second mute in all audio with closecall priority.. instead of the 1 second break but SEXY radio.. And performance on very very distant weak repeaters on VHF excellent........................

Uniden did this right with the new receiver design... wow.. 1 request if possible would be an adjustable receive gain of maybe user selectable gain and antenuation per band? like say a +-2-3 db if its being software defined... just to increase range a bit or perhaps antenuate the cell band a bit more to stop some bleed through from cell towers... is it possible to incorporate step attenuations like 2 4 6 8 db etc......

 

[jonwienke]

Well for so many complaints about reception being band whiped completely in vhf from low power portables 5 miles away I believe this is a major issue...

I live about 1000 feet from a cell/pager tower and haven't noticed the VHF band being wiped out. Reception in the VHF band has been comparable with the 436 and 536.

 

[SCPD]

I live about 1000 feet from a cell/pager tower and haven't noticed the VHF band being wiped out. Reception in the VHF band has been comparable with the 436 and 536.

That Jonwienke is because cell towers arent doing it... Cell towers are in a complete diferent band... now take scanners side by side on a multicoupler like the mca204m and have sds100 monitor 1 known frequency say somewhere in the 159 mhz range while monitoring that frequency on hold mode preferably DMR or digital and when you start getting vhf clipping watch signal bars on sds 100 dissapear as a pager or close by transmission picks up in the vhf spectrum... also see if you get noaa weather band on 162.35 on sds100..


its whipes out all from 156 - 160 mhz... dont believe me try it out...
Dont be another that hates because several others are complaining of the exact same VHF whipe out as I Am... sounds like you think the cell band is knocking the vhf out its NOT... its frequencies overlapping/ghost imaging the whole vhf band from VHF HI BANF FREQUENCIES and seeing you know it all you would also know that VZW towers are 780mhz and 1.2ghz and not VHF

 

[jonwienke]

That Jonwienke is because cell towers arent doing it... Cell towers are in a complete diferent band... now take scanners side by side on a multicoupler like the mca204m and have sds100 monitor 1 known frequency say somewhere in the 159 mhz range while monitoring that frequency on hold mode preferably DMR or digital and when you start getting vhf clipping watch signal bars on sds 100 dissapear as a pager or close by transmission picks up in the vhf spectrum... also see if you get noaa weather band on 162.35 on sds100..

The cell freqs aren't VHF, but there is a VHF pager transmitter on the same tower. And it's powerful enough to spam the entire VHF band on some CCRs--I can hear the pager noise on any VHF freq using a BTECH mobile. But I can still get the same NOAA channels with the SDS100 that I do with the 436, 536, and other radios. And I don't hear the pager noise when listening to aircraft, railroads, NOAA, VHF ham, MURS, etc. with the SDS100. So whatever your issue is, you can't generalize it to say that the SDS100 always overloads with any strong nearby VHF transmission.

Also, I use a BNC T when comparing radios because you can't overload the T fitting, but you can overload the preamp in the multicoupler. I would try that to verify whether your multicoupler is part of the problem.

 

[mikewazowski]

Gents, I've deleted a whole pile of posts that have nothing to do with the firmware upgrade.


Please keep your posts on-topic.

 

[WX4JCW]

I'm not seeing any wiping at all, on certain railroad frequencies I do see that NOAA stations bleed through, the radio is definitely somewhat weaker on VHF/UHF but I wonder if some of it has to do with the cold solder joint issue that was mentioned, this current firmware works wonderfully for me, and I agree with Jon on the multicoupler issue, a more valid test would be to separate the radios


Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
XPR7550 - SDS100

 

[WX4JCW]

Fargo ND VHF P25 perfect decode

Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
XPR7550 - SDS100

 

[racin06]

I've noticed some improvement on P25 systems. Though my SDS100 was already performing great! Another hobby I have is photography and I shoot with Fujifilm's X Series system. Fujifilm is known for continuous improvement and frequent firmware updates for their cameras and lenses. Uniden is no different! Thanks, Uniden!

 

[SCPD]

The cell freqs aren't VHF, but there is a VHF pager transmitter on the same tower. And it's powerful enough to spam the entire VHF band on some CCRs--I can hear the pager noise on any VHF freq using a BTECH mobile. But I can still get the same NOAA channels with the SDS100 that I do with the 436, 536, and other radios. And I don't hear the pager noise when listening to aircraft, railroads, NOAA, VHF ham, MURS, etc. with the SDS100. So whatever your issue is, you can't generalize it to say that the SDS100 always overloads with any strong nearby VHF transmission.

Also, I use a BNC T when comparing radios because you can't overload the T fitting, but you can overload the preamp in the multicoupler. I would try that to verify whether your multicoupler is part of the problem.

Hooking 2 scanners to a non isolated BNC T can and will cause interference to the `2 scanners. Also with no isolation between the BNC T and the 2 scanners 1 will automatically dominate the other in RF while causing RFI to the other. Also you can damage the receivepreamp and protection DIODES by backfeeding vdc from 1 scanner to another... Give facts instead of trying to Burn out peoples scanners that alot of people work sun up to sun down to buy...

 

[mule1075]

I deleted him from my list of friends and ignored him as an administrator told me to also his method of hooking two scanners up to a single BNC T adapter burned out all reception on the sds100 and Uniden tech on phone said it was because there was no isolation between the two scanners and basically send in and pay up.. And because I reported his post I received a infraction on this site.. he shouldn't tell people to try things that will burn out a scanner..

Have had all my scanners hooked up to a single bnc tee adapter for more than 10 years. Has never caused a problem.

 

[mikewazowski]

Gents, discussion of hooking together two or more scanners together with a bnc connector can be discussed here: https://forums.radioreference.com/u...840-upman-help-bnc-t-hooked-996p2-sds100.html

 

[RCjim]

P25 NAC:

I have ignore site NAC turned on. On that line I see P25 NAC:2A5h the assigned NAC for my
P25 P2 system when looking for activity. But at times when I hear audio there is a different NAC number to the right on the display at times it's 0A9h and at times 4F2h with good reception. Then there are times the assigned NAC 2A5h is shown alone when hearing audio. Can anyone explain what is happening I'm using the latest Beta firmware? Do I need to adjust my settings?

P25 NAC: 2A5h
OR
NAC: 2A5h (0A9h or 4F2h) will be flashing when audio is heard.


My SDS100 works great, I'm not complaing just wondering what I'm seeing!

Thanks

 

[jasonhouk]

I have ignore site NAC turned on. On that line I see P25 NAC:2A5h the assigned NAC for my
P25 P2 system when looking for activity. But at times when I hear audio there is a different NAC number to the right on the display at times it's 0A9h and at times 4F2h with good reception. Then there are times the assigned NAC 2A5h is shown alone when hearing audio. Can anyone explain what is happening I'm using the latest Beta firmware? Do I need to adjust my settings?

P25 NAC: 2A5h
OR
NAC: 2A5h (0A9h or 4F2h) will be flashing when audio is heard.


My SDS100 works great, I'm not complaing just wondering what I'm seeing!

Thanks

Possibly an in band image from an adjacent site or another nearby system on the same frequency.

Applying IFX to the voice channels that are affected and using the proper NAC code helped aliviate my issues that were similar.

Houk

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[WX4JCW]

I have ignore site NAC turned on. On that line I see P25 NAC:2A5h the assigned NAC for my

P25 P2 system when looking for activity. But at times when I hear audio there is a different NAC number to the right on the display at times it's 0A9h and at times 4F2h with good reception. Then there are times the assigned NAC 2A5h is shown alone when hearing audio. Can anyone explain what is happening I'm using the latest Beta firmware? Do I need to adjust my settings?



P25 NAC: 2A5h

OR

NAC: 2A5h (0A9h or 4F2h) will be flashing when audio is heard.





My SDS100 works great, I'm not complaing just wondering what I'm seeing!



Thanks

The NAC’s in the RRDB are incorrect


Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
XPR7550 - SDS100

 

[u2brent]

Oh, it's not just you.
The radio seems incapable of determining NAC while decoding voice on PH2 in particular.
If you read the entire thread you'll see it's nearly everybody's observation.. and on the last fw's as well.

The CC NAC seems (more) reliable, The voice ch NAC is useless.

IMHO

The function's description can be found in POST #1 of this thread.

http://forums.radioreference.com/un...-1-05-00m-1-01-05s-open-beta.html#post2972409

 

[werinshades]

Oh, it's not just you.
The radio seems incapable of determining NAC while decoding voice on PH2 in particular.
If you read the entire thread you'll see it's nearly everybody's observation.. and on the last fw's as well.

The CC NAC seems (more) reliable, The voice ch NAC is useless.[/url]

I'm confused as to what you just posted? I have both P25 Phase 1 and Phase 2 systems programmed in, NAC codes are set and correct and scanner is following data and voice channels without issues.

 

[u2brent]

I guess my radio is defective.

On PH1 the NAC displays as it's supposed to, mostly.

On the 3 PH2 systems I monitor the NAC has NEVER displayed the programed NAC while on the voice ch.
It decodes the voice just fine, The NAC display is what I was referring to.

And sometimes the correct NAC is displayed (on Ph1) and the second NAC value is the same but flashes as if its wrong.. D63h D63h


On the one ph2 system the CC NAC is 00A. The voice channels almost always display D63 or 293, or FFF, Never once have I seen 00A while decoding voice.

Is it possible that there are systems with CC and Voice Ch's that are different NAC's?

 

[rbrtklamp2]

I think Harris systems use a different NACs on the voice channels it was a issue a while back when trying to monitor them with a moto XTS if the firmware was to old. Other than that I don't know why the radio would be showing different NACs on the voice channels. UPMan you have any ideas?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[andrew_m]

I've been on the newest non-beta software up to today when I installed the beta. On the non-beta my close by local analog systems were so quiet. I would have it turned up to 15 and couldn't hear half of what was said. This beta fixed that problem.

 

[SCPD]

Solid but no blinking LED.

I've been on the newest non-beta software up to today when I installed the beta. On the non-beta my close by local analog systems were so quiet. I would have it turned up to 15 and couldn't hear half of what was said. This beta fixed that problem.

Try setting the radio to Search I get a lot more traffic on VHF with it set to CTCSS search or NAC search if its digital.

Anyone else have this issue and yes I am running the beta, when you set a channel to slow or fast blink it does not blink? It does however come on solid if set so.
I have many channels set to flash, I had the BCD-436HP so I know how to program it.

Another oddity is the broadcast band is scratchy,88-107.9 MHZ either WFM or BFM mode.
I am 10 miles from WAXQ 104.3. Steps at 100khz.

Anyone get their battery yet?