SDS100 Reception Issues on LASD 480 Analog Frequencies

[dmullen1373]

Yeah my used 436HP does way better on everything than the SDS -- does anybody have a clue as to whether or not LA-RICS is going to have TRUE simulcast sites where an SDS will be actually be required? I currently have the SG, East and Johnstone (all 700MHz) sites unavoided and I haven't had any trouble on my 436HP.

I guess I'm trying to determine whether or not the SDS is going to do better that what my 436HP already does and whether or not I should try and get my $650 back!

 

[2006walt]

Ops just found the G5 forum.

 

[tkenny53]

In my car with a external antenna on the trunk, I get lots of noise in the 470mhz area, sds100, but with a rubber antenna on the radio in the car, I get zero interference. All other freq's work fine

 

[62Truck]

It is the receiver chip that are of a too low quality to be used in a high end scanner, but was a low cost solution to be able to receive simulcast systems.

It not that its low quality, its that they are using a chip that is meant for a TV tuner which is pretty broadband, and doesn't do well filtering out adjacent channels.

What I would like to see Uniden do, is make the attenuator adjustable so you can fine tune it.

 

[tsalmrsystemtech]

I guarantee Unication puts in a better upgraded chip than Uniden. Their radios are really sensitive and work great.

 

[Ubbe]

It not that its low quality

It's low quality with lots of internal spurious signals are its biggest problem, then adjacent channel and overload issues. For home use with a constant signal level on the channels, a user adjustable 0-30dB attenuator would probably work to improve reception (with a saved value for each system?) but mobile it would be too much variations in signal level to be useful.

SDS100.mp4

drive.google.com

/Ubbe