Keep in mind GPS doesn't care about or function with regard to jurisdictional boundaries (and neither does the database). If you're looking for that kind of function or scanning control you're going to be disappointed.
sds100-GPS
- Thread starter bee
- Start date
- Status
Keep in mind GPS doesn't care about or function with regard to jurisdictional boundaries (and neither does the database). If you're looking for that kind of function or scanning control you're going to be disappointed.
KB7MIB
Member
Which is why an internal solution should be standard.
Or are you saying that you don't want an internal solution to be standard? If so, why not? Price? Jon Wienke said that it shouldn't cost significantly more to add it internally, given his personal costs to do it aftermarket.
John
Peoria, AZ
Last edited:
KB7MIB
Member
Then how are people using it to select/deselect systems based on their location, if it doesn't work that way?
John
Peoria, AZ
Location Control is based on distance between the transmitter and the scanner, rather than whether they are both in the same city/county/state. If you live near the edge of a large county, the scanner will scan things from the adjacent county, and may not scan things in the same county if they are on the opposite side. IMO it's a better approach overall because RF reception more closely correlates to distance than borders.
As you can SEE I DO NOT NEED 12 I have 2 WHY SHOULD I BUY 10 MORE JUST SO YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BUY ONE. IT IS PLAIN AND SIMPLE YOU WANT ONE BUY ONE BUT DO NOT FORCE ME TO BUY THINGS I DO NOT WANT OR NEED.
It works on a radius around your location (and a radius around the database entries). It's a very broad, blunt control method that's great for longer travels, but isn't that useful for a 5-10 mile cruise across town, especially if you're in a huge county like Maricopa.
You say that observing the economies of scale for the GPS unit itself, but not seeing the bigger picture - the time spent designing, engineering, machining the molds, testing... oops, turns out the battery doesn't live long enough. Crap, new battery doesn't fit inside the unit. Then there's warranty coverage, etc., etc. Gotta factor in a profit margin with those additional costs, too, otherwise why bother. So in reality it would cost Uniden customers far more than $20 extra per scanner.
At 5 miles it's still not a very fine control like John was thinking, and that's because of the way the database works. Even if it were extremely precise it would probably be pretty annoying.
jasonhouk
Member
My sweet spot is zero mile for areas I've been testing in. I'd actually like to see a negative setting as in some occasions the amount of sites the scanner cycles through causes missed comms. I could go in my favorites list and manually tweak the sites range but for longer trips where I don't know the sites/systems, full database is the way to go.
Houk
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
KB7MIB
Member
If the GPS control isn't that fine, then it wouldn't work for me personally, as I want that fine control, so I would continue to select and deselect manually. Even for longer drives, county and state lines generally determine when I do so.
John
Peoria, AZ
John
Peoria, AZ
Set your range to zero, then the scanner will only select those systems that your GPS location is physically within the boundaries. It may not be perfect, but when you're driving around a large metropolitan area, dense with systems, you won't be listening to systems that your 5 mile or greater radius would have intersected.
Perhaps I'm the weird one in the group, but I never use the full database, even now with integrated GPS. I also use rectangles (except for trunked system sites) to mimic, roughly, the jurisdictions I find myself in. Also, I use zero on the range so that I have to be in the area I want to monitor.
It's a bit more work, but it's worth it. Perhaps not if I were frequently traversing large areas, but I tend to stay in a two/three state area. I also don't care for the default text tags in many cases.
The reason Uniden doesn't include an integrated GPS in it's handheld units is that, apparently, it doesn't see why someone would use a handheld in a vehicle. It's not because of engineering concerns or profit considerations.
It's a bit more work, but it's worth it. Perhaps not if I were frequently traversing large areas, but I tend to stay in a two/three state area. I also don't care for the default text tags in many cases.
The reason Uniden doesn't include an integrated GPS in it's handheld units is that, apparently, it doesn't see why someone would use a handheld in a vehicle. It's not because of engineering concerns or profit considerations.
The problem I see with that is in cities that straddle multiple counties. Dallas, Texas, sits in 5 different counties. If you're in Dallas but in Collin or Rockwall county and have your radius set to 0, you're going to lose Dallas county.
I'm factoring all that in, as has TYT for the MD-390. The GPS itself is available for $14 retail. In quantity, cost is likely less than $10. $10/unit is plenty to cover the extra cost of engineering the GPS into the unit. I've already gone through the engineering process on the 436, and it's not nearly the big deal you're making it out to be. The GPS reduces battery life by about 20% on the 436, and it's even less of an issue for the SDS100, since the SDS100 draws about 4x the power of the 436.
Hence the "or less". I usually use 0 or 2 miles.
My educated guess is that Uniden would add about $90 to the price of the scanner if they integrated GPS.
$20 per unit is nowhere near enough to cover the additional costs, let alone make it worth their while. Not to mention, the MD-390 (and all of its other-branded versions) are manufactured in numbers orders of magnitude more than Uniden scanners.
KB7MIB
Member
I think there'd be an issue when trying to select/deselect individual cities that share a common regional system.
Simulcast G of the Regional Wireless Cooperative in the Phoenix area carries 7 city PD's, 3 Phoenix PD precincts, a tribal PD at a casino, the entire community college district security department (with 2 campuses in the West Valley), the EMS TG's for entire regional fire dispatch center, and others.
I would want each city to turn on and off at the city line, which isn't possible with the current level of GPS location based scanning technology.
Outside the metro area, with towns and cities spread farther apart, selecting that system a few miles out would be more appropriate.
It's disappointing, but it is what it is. Maybe in the future, we'll have smarter GPS location based scanning technology.
Thanks all.
John
Peoria, AZ
Simulcast G of the Regional Wireless Cooperative in the Phoenix area carries 7 city PD's, 3 Phoenix PD precincts, a tribal PD at a casino, the entire community college district security department (with 2 campuses in the West Valley), the EMS TG's for entire regional fire dispatch center, and others.
I would want each city to turn on and off at the city line, which isn't possible with the current level of GPS location based scanning technology.
Outside the metro area, with towns and cities spread farther apart, selecting that system a few miles out would be more appropriate.
It's disappointing, but it is what it is. Maybe in the future, we'll have smarter GPS location based scanning technology.
Thanks all.
John
Peoria, AZ
And how many internal GPS units have you installed? In how many different scanner models?
The only reason I charge what I do is because of the labor involved in fabricating the wiring harness by hand, soldering the components together by hand, and manually cutting the hole in the case for the GPS antenna. If that stuff was automated, and the case had the GPS cutout molded in, a $20 price premium would be eminently reasonable.
- Status
Similar threads
