What about MDC-1200

[XTS3000]

Let's say that the 396XT hardware could support the decoding of MDC-1200 with only a firmware upgrade.

With the above in mind, would Uniden have to pay Motorola money for each scanner that contained MDC-1200 decode firmware? Assuming Motorola would license MDC-1200 to Uniden.

 

[DaveNF2G]

MDC1200 was cracked years ago and there is a DOS-based decoder already "in the wild." Like trunktracking, it does not appear that licensing should be an issue. The real obstacle is perceived insufficiency of market demand on the part of the scanner makers.

 

[mmckenna]

I believe the patent on MDC-1200 expired. Many manufacturers have started putting it in their radios, including Kenwood and Vertex.

MDC-1200 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Skypilot007]

Yep..I had a Relm RMV800 that had it although they called it HDC-1200 and it also had HDC-2400. It didn't work very well however. The decode was good but the encode was wacked. Sold that thing.

 

[doctordialtone]

MDC1200 Decoder Ring

MDC1200 was cracked years ago and there is a DOS-based decoder already "in the wild." Like trunktracking, it does not appear that licensing should be an issue. The real obstacle is perceived insufficiency of market demand on the part of the scanner makers.

Here's one:
antistatic.org - winmdcd


Now all you need is something like a cheat sheet to convert the ID into something meaningful.

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

There's a similar one called BIIS-1200 that I've seen advertised by an Icom dealer. I don't know the difference between BIIS-1200 and MDC-1200, however.

 

[DaveNF2G]

Now we need a decoder for GEStar.

 

[RobKB1FJR]

I think it depends on the radio system also. Some systems like Boston Police the MDC-1200 Burst only shows up on the inputs not on the outputs then again Boston PD has a specialized system that allows the dispatcher to talk while the units are still transmitting.

 

[slicerwizard]

Boston PD has a specialized system that allows the dispatcher to talk while the units are still transmitting.

Every decent public safety system works that way.

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

i thought it was the other way around? An officer can override the dispatcher for officer safety in case things go bad while the dispatcher was talking? I hear officers do it all the time as a dispatcher is putting a call out on the RWC in Phoenix, AZ.

 

[tampabaynews]

Every decent public safety system works that way.

Incorrect. It's optional. The agency I worked for, the unit can override the dispatcher. Another one nearby on the same kind of system, no one can interrupt another.

 

[slicerwizard]

i thought it was the other way around? An officer can override the dispatcher for officer safety in case things go bad while the dispatcher was talking? I hear officers do it all the time as a dispatcher is putting a call out on the RWC in Phoenix, AZ.

One doesn't preclude the other.

Incorrect. It's optional. The agency I worked for, the unit can override the dispatcher. Another one nearby on the same kind of system, no one can interrupt another.

If a system is configured such that a dispatcher can't override an officer who is sitting on his mic, I wouldn't call it a decent PS system.

 

[DaveNF2G]

Your definition of "decent" differs from the definitions of radio shops, public safety agencies and others. Not surprising, as you are in a foreign country (with respect to Boston), and there is no single point of view on anything that holds true across the USA.

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

Ok, it would make sense then, at least to me, to allow an officer to override a dispatcher for officer safety reasons, and for a dispatcher to be able to override an officer in the event of a stuck microphone. So both should be standard features.

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

My opinion only, of course.

 

[slicerwizard]

Your definition of "decent" differs from the definitions of radio shops, public safety agencies and others. Not surprising, as you are in a foreign country (with respect to Boston), and there is no single point of view on anything that holds true across the USA.

That has to be one of your lamest posts ever. Next, you'll be arguing the value of Pi...

 

[SCPD]

Ok, it would make sense then, at least to me, to allow an officer to override a dispatcher for officer safety reasons

The officer can press the Emergency button.

Anytime you allow one party to talk over another, someone's words go unheard. Worse, the speaker and audience may be unaware this has happened.

 

[exkalibur]

Wait, what?

A fairly standard feature in any well built public safety system is the ability for the dispatcher to hear a transmitting field unit when he/she is transmitting. The repeaters in this situation aren't a repeater in the standard meaning - when the dispatcher is transmitting, the receiver can still receive field unit audio and feed it to the dispatcher's earpiece.

Likewise, the reverse is also the case - a dispatcher can interrupt a field unit that is transmitting. IIRC it is called Dispatcher Preemption.

To design a sytem where that isn't possible is fairly irresponsible. Heck, a VHF conventional system that's been on the air since the last 70's near me is capable of it.

 

[WA0CBW]

What exkalibur is describing requires wireline control from the dispatcher to the repeater. The audio from the repeater receiver is brought back to the dispatch position by wireline, microwave, Voip, or whatever. This allows the dispatcher to hear the mobile units while talking (a repeater is duplex). The dispatcher audio can be configured to overide the repeater receiver audio thus giving priority to the dispatcher.

Many dispatch configurations use control stations to get to the repeater. Control station operation is just like any of the other users of the repeater. The strongest station wins (the capture effect) so there really isn't any dispatcher priority in these systems.

Systems that use base stations can't be configured to hear and talk at the same time as the transmitter and receiver are on the same frequency and the receiver is muted in the transmit mode.

BB

 

[SCPD]

In your example, the dispatcher has the luxury (and challenge) of being able to hear multiple conversations at once. I see no issue in this scenario. Worst case is a simple "Say again". However, as WA0CBW alludes to, the dispatch console may be just a radio tied to computer. Their abilities are essentially the same as other radios on the system. Many backup dispatch centers are just that.

Allowing someone to preempt where they can only talk or listen is a bad thing. I think the emergency button is a more than adequate attention-getter.

Sorry folks, I just remembered this is an MDC1200 discussion.