- Joined
- Apr 22, 2016
- Messages
- 128
so like a mid range dell laptop?
The official "I want LSM to work properly in my scanner" thread
- Status
He just said "like a $1000". Forget about comparing it to a laptop. Compare $1000 to $1000
m
At this point, what is stopping anybody from buying an xts-5000 and programming it for non-affiliate scan? I did that a few years ago and pretty much stopped coming to this site because I had no need for support. It works 100% of the time.
Cost and complexity come to mind.
RFI-EMI-GUY
Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2013
- Messages
- 7,555
Even if you get an XTS5K at a decent price, it wont do P25 Phase 2 TDMA. I am hoping Uniden or Whistler will get moving on a I/Q demodulator.
I doubt it. They are doing well selling radios not fully compatible with P25.
Even a 2016 release scanner (TRX series) still uses FM --> P25 attempt. According to documents I have seen. P25 is not compatible with existing FM designs. DMR is, this is why DMR works well with current scanners.
Scanners today do not meet minimum P25 compatibly specifications. I do not see future scanners making changes. I suspect (Uniden/Whistler) Uses a generic radio receiver chipset that does not output I/Q due to cost of R&D. They do not seem to design circuits anymore due to the high cost of R&D involves.
Modern scanners just use OEM chips for the control plane CPU and a generic OEM radio chipset for DSP/RF/Demod. They are limited to what the generic OEM chips offer. I would not be surprised if both Whistler/Uniden use the same exact chips with the differentiator being software and other flashy type customer facing features.
I beg to differ with you neither Motorola nor Kenwood use 2 transmitters and receivers in their radios and they both do P25 Digital and Analog FM with the same receiver and transmitter. The digital decoders are of the same series as the scanners. But you can rest assured the Motorola is not sharing all the data they have on simulcast P25 either. The big giant Tait is having trouble getting rid of all the 4 site simulcast DMR system in Jackson Tn they had to bring in factory engineers to help with the system but there are still places where the DMR sites mix. It sounds better 20 miles from the site than it does 2 miles from the site and that does not make any sense. I was traveling to Memphis and the North site sounded better at Mile Marker 60 than it did when I drove by the Three Way Site at 45E and 45W.
cpetraglia
Member
You show me where to get the software, explain how to properly program it, and I'll gladly find a /\/\ radio and set it up for receive only. I have done a lot searching and never found any detailed instructions. I wouldn't even know what software ver. to use. And yes the PII is becoming more relevant.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
You license the software from Motorola, there are VERY detailed instructions on Communications.Support, and the version needs to be equal to, or newer, the last version the radio was programmed with.
If the system(s) you listen to are phase 2, then you need an APX radio in the band(s) you listen to, software is available from Motorola as well and it needs to be equal to, or newer than the version last used to program the radio.
There is TONS of info out there on no-affiliate scanning, you just need to look for it.
If the system(s) you listen to are phase 2, then you need an APX radio in the band(s) you listen to, software is available from Motorola as well and it needs to be equal to, or newer than the version last used to program the radio.
There is TONS of info out there on no-affiliate scanning, you just need to look for it.
slicerwizard
Member
TIA/EIA-102.BAAA
Project 25 FDMA Common Air Interface
9.6 QPSK Demodulator
The QPSK demodulator is capable of receiving a signal from either the C4FM
modulator or the CQPSK modulator. It consists of a frequency modulation
detector, followed by an Integrate and Dump Filter and then a stochastic gradient
clock recovery device. The frequency modulation detector can be a standard
discriminator output provided by an FM receiver.
scanningisfun
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 689
+1 for no affiliate scanning with an XTS/APX IF you know what you are doing.
Jacob
Jacob
It's been eight months since anyone posted to this thread, but I believe it is still 'active'.
Last week I was in Little Rock, Arkansas and I brought my Uniden 536HP with me to the hotel room. At first, I had the usual LSM issues with monitoring the Little Rock simulcast system, but I through trial-and-error experimentation with location in the room, antenna length, and orientation, I was able to get pretty good decoding. If I put the 536 four inches from the extreme right side of the window, with the antenna extended halfway, and tilted at a 45 degree angle to the left, I was able to get very good decode of the AWIN Little Rock simulcast system.
When it comes to digital systems, even moving the unit a few inches and positioning the antenna in the "right" way can make a big difference. If you are patient and experiment some, you may find that "sweet spot".
Last week I was in Little Rock, Arkansas and I brought my Uniden 536HP with me to the hotel room. At first, I had the usual LSM issues with monitoring the Little Rock simulcast system, but I through trial-and-error experimentation with location in the room, antenna length, and orientation, I was able to get pretty good decoding. If I put the 536 four inches from the extreme right side of the window, with the antenna extended halfway, and tilted at a 45 degree angle to the left, I was able to get very good decode of the AWIN Little Rock simulcast system.
When it comes to digital systems, even moving the unit a few inches and positioning the antenna in the "right" way can make a big difference. If you are patient and experiment some, you may find that "sweet spot".
KA1RBI
Member
That certainly doesn't mean that there hasn't been a lot of discussion of simulcast woes... One of the very best comments about it recently is this one:
That was very well said, IMHO...
and it is interesting to ask (yet again) why "real system radios" have no such crazinesses....
73
Max
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
Because real subscriber radios are not garbage POS scanners with no front end filtering and a discriminator tap. The receivers are designed specifically to receive the various modulations(LSM, CQPSK, WCQPSK Ect.)used in simulcast systems. A scanner receivers is FM and while it will receive and decode C4FM fine, it fails misrably on simulcast waveforms.
Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk
Add to it a company like Unication making the G4 and G5. I own 2 G4 pagers, 2 436 scanners and a WS1080 so i try to test them all. LOL Wouldnt it be amazing if Uniden made a receiver like the G4 or if Unication made a scanner like Uniden. 
These two companies need to come together and have a baby scanner.
We shall call it, The UnidenIcation G4436
These two companies need to come together and have a baby scanner.
We shall call it, The UnidenIcation G4436
This is actually comical. Thank goodness there are companies who make radios that work.
The official... yada, yada
Whew, hearing all these old complaints takes me back. NOW I'm very happy I paid the $660 bucks to get a Unication G5 Pager/radio. I rarely use my Whistler WS1080 outside the house now. The Whistler website has a pic or did* of a storm chaser scenario with a P25 Trunked system showing on the scanner with an F4 in the background. I wouldn't trust my *** to the Whistler doing that. The Unication G4/5's? yes, loud and clear. :0)
Whew, hearing all these old complaints takes me back. NOW I'm very happy I paid the $660 bucks to get a Unication G5 Pager/radio. I rarely use my Whistler WS1080 outside the house now. The Whistler website has a pic or did* of a storm chaser scenario with a P25 Trunked system showing on the scanner with an F4 in the background. I wouldn't trust my *** to the Whistler doing that. The Unication G4/5's? yes, loud and clear. :0)
I'm glad the Unication pagers meet the needs of some people. If it wasn't for the inability to monitor more than one trunked system at a time, I would be tempted to get one. But with that limitation, I'd need about four of them to replace the two digital scanners I use all the time, and I'm not going to pay that much money.
Fortunately I don't live in an urban area (last week I was attending a conference in Little Rock), so from my relatively rural location 65 miles northwest of Little Rock, I have few problems with simulcast issues from the Russellville, Nimrod and Hector towers.
Jimco
Member
I can relate to this. I am fortunate in that the vast majority of my interests are on one system. For that reason, my G5 works great for me and I love it. However, if you want to monitor multiple systems, I can see how it would not be a suitable radio.
I actually use my G5 and my 436 simultaneously at times, and when I do, I cringe as I am reminded of how horrible the 436 is at dealing with simulcast systems.
Jim
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Status
Similar threads
