Video: 17 min. 45 sec. of P25 simulcast scanning bliss by the BCD436HP

Status
Not open for further replies.

KC9NEG

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
696
Location
Indianapolis, IN USA
Next time my feed goes to heck if you're still copying it well I'll be fully convinced. As stated previously, I monitor that system several hours per day, and we're in a period of unusually good reception. I'm not sure if they changed something with the system, but I'm not complaining :)
 

KC9NEG

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
696
Location
Indianapolis, IN USA
EDIT: I had posted observations, but I've removed them so as not to color opinion. Those who can access the feed archives can make a direct comparison of my feed audio to that of the 436. You'll want to start listening on 2/1 at about 20:28. This is a very good test, since racin06 seems to be scanning only dispatch channels, identical to my feed.
 
Last edited:

racin06

Member
Joined
May 30, 2004
Messages
668
Location
Westfield, Indiana
Why not post your observations and opinions? I'm not sure what your point is. If your RS Pro-197 setup is outperforming my BCD436, then so be it. The only point I have been making is that the 436 monitors the IDPS system very well and my previous scanners, RS Pro-2096, Uniden BCD396T and PSR-800 could never monitor IDPS with any success. Now, I will be honest and say that I had never tried using a yagi antenna with any of my previous scanners. Perhaps using a yagi would have made the IDPS at least somewhat monitorable. However, a yagi certainly isn't a compact and portable solution, which is what I prefer.

You say that we are in a period of unusually good reception of the IDPS. Perhaps we are, but I interpret you are saying the 436 isn't that good. I read where you are using a yagi on your Pro-197 to monitor IDPS and as I have previously noted, I'm using the RS 800MHz portable antenna on my 436. Why not try this...remove the yagi and try the RS 800MHz antenna on your Pro-197 and observe the results compared to my 436. The results may be quite telling ;).
 
Last edited:

KC9NEG

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
696
Location
Indianapolis, IN USA
These tests can only be true comparisons if both radios are in the same location with the same antenna, tuned to achieve their respective maximum performance.
 

racin06

Member
Joined
May 30, 2004
Messages
668
Location
Westfield, Indiana
Exactly, I agree. Then any observations made about your setup versus the 436 on monitoring the IDPS is a mute point. However, I go back to my original point that I never was able to monitor the IDPS with my previous scanners, but I can, and rather well, with the 436 AND with an omnidirectional antenna.
 

KC9NEG

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
696
Location
Indianapolis, IN USA
Racin06, have you noticed any performance change with your 436 today? I just experienced (15 minutes ago, at about 12:30 PM) a marked decrease in reception of DPSC on my Pro-197 feed scanner. I had had my feed scanner's global ATT function engaged, which had provided the best decode. I just had to disengage ATT to restore good reception. This is verified through subsequently engaging and disengaging ATT... ATT on--poor receive, ATT off--good receive. Valid point of comparison if you've noticed anything today.

EDIT: this was a temporary condition. I have re-engaged the ATT function and I'm receiving fine again _shrugs_
 
Last edited:

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
7,498
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
These tests can only be true comparisons if both radios are in the same location with the same antenna, tuned to achieve their respective maximum performance.
...and we can actually see a video of the old scanners performing badly on the same exact system at the same exact time as we see the new scanner performing flawlessly.

M
 

racin06

Member
Joined
May 30, 2004
Messages
668
Location
Westfield, Indiana
Racin06, have you noticed any performance change with your 436 today? I just experienced (15 minutes ago, at about 12:30 PM) a marked decrease in reception of DPSC on my Pro-197 feed scanner. I had had my feed scanner's global ATT function engaged, which had provided the best decode. I just had to disengage ATT to restore good reception. This is verified through subsequently engaging and disengaging ATT... ATT on--poor receive, ATT off--good receive. Valid point of comparison if you've noticed anything today.

EDIT: this was a temporary condition. I have re-engaged the ATT function and I'm receiving fine again _shrugs_
Sorry for the delay in replying. I didn't notice any degradation in reception yesterday. However, at this time tonight (during the snow storm), I do notice a little degradation in the IDPS. The 436 is still monitoring the IDPS very well; however, I hear an occasional tx clip.
 

bear780ks

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
934
Location
Central KS
I'm posting another video of my BCD436HP scanning the Indianapolis Department of Public Safety P25 simulcast system just in case some may believe my previous video (https://vimeo.com/85494169) was a one hit wonder. The bottom line is that the BCD436 is for real and Uniden has hit a home run with this scanner! Whistler? Who Dey ;).

https://vimeo.com/85630988
Can't watch the Video's as I'm not a member of Vimeo can you post some on YouTube can see them there :D Thanks Bear..
 

br0adband

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Messages
1,569
Location
Springfield MO
Can't watch the Video's as I'm not a member of Vimeo can you post some on YouTube can see them there :D Thanks Bear..
Vimeo doesn't require membership to watch such videos, it's publicly available. If it won't load in one particular browser, try another (like problems with IE, try Chrome, if Chrome doesn't work try Firefox, etc). Adobe Flash Player is required, that much is for certain (and the cause of most issues of watching videos online). Make sure everything is updated to their latest versions and it should play just fine.
 

bear780ks

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
934
Location
Central KS
Ok we'll give it a Try) I'm using F.F. currently and it said under the video there's no sound because I needed to be signed in and right under the video you could see this line that represents like it buffering.. or something

But for sure I'll give it Try on Chrome because I'd like to see the Video.


Thanks :cool: Bear
 

JoeyC

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,403
Location
San Diego, CA
I must be spoiled having all these years listened to my local system on old-school 785/796 & the newer 996XT scanners. The reception on these dated scanners are awesome in comparison to the choppy, poppy, crackly decode I am hearing in this video and on my 536HP. If this is an improvement for you I am very happy for you, but the quality of the audio is far inferior to what I am accustomed to. I am very curious to know what the factors are that are creating such wildly different results across different systems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top