My Uniden 396 performs "EXCELLENT" on all three of my outside
antennas=RS25-1.3 grndplane with 9913coax, and two ChannelMaster 5094A
one with 9913 and one with RG8U up 35'...Im 35 miles SW of Chicago and
i receive all UHF-460mgz zones fine on the 396 so UHF is not a problem
on mine...On the ILL-Starcom 700/800mgz Digital System it does very
well using 1.13.17 ver, Auto8 and set to FM....Some have gone to 3.01
and had bad results....I get very little overload on the 396...The
only problem with the 396 is "AUDIO", using a external speaker is very
helpful...The audio on the GRE/RS models is excellent...I have been a
Uniden person for years and thank both companys for fine products....A
very HAPPY NEW YEAR to all , i appreciate all your yearly post's and
have learned alot....

Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 16:42, craigheld18 <craigheld18@...> wrote:
> Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?

Q1, 2009.

--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!

Last I recall reading on this group just before Christmas at least another year
:-(

Regards
Wayne.

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Peter Laws
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:42 AM
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date


   On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 16:42, craigheld18 <craigheld18@...> wrote:
   > Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?

   Q1, 2009.

   --
   Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

   No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I don't remember that post. Regardless, it is wrong.
As has been posted many times, Q1 2009. IOW, soon.

Joe M.

Wayne wrote:
> Last I recall reading on this group just before Christmas at least another
year :-(
>
> Regards
> Wayne.
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Peter Laws
>   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:42 AM
>   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date
>
>
>   On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 16:42, craigheld18 <craigheld18@...> wrote:
>   > Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?
>
>   Q1, 2009.
>
>   --
>   Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
>
>   No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

That didn't come from Upman, who has steadfastly stuck with "first quarter
of 2009"

John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date


> Last I recall reading on this group just before Christmas at least another
> year :-(
>
> Regards
> Wayne.
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Peter Laws
>  To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
>  Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:42 AM
>  Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date
>
>
>  On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 16:42, craigheld18 <craigheld18@...> wrote:
>  > Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?
>
>  Q1, 2009.
>
>  --
>  Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
>
>  No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 19:49, Wayne <turbine_prop@...> wrote:
> Last I recall reading on this group just before Christmas at least another
year :-(


You read wrong.  The date has been, and remains, Q1 2009.

Unless UPMan says otherwise.



--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!

That was some jerk that said it could be another year.
Some people have nothing better to do with their life than be critical.

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Wayne
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:49 PM
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date


   Last I recall reading on this group just before Christmas at least another
year :-(

   Regards
   Wayne.

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Peter Laws
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:42 AM
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Release date

   On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 16:42, craigheld18 <craigheld18@...> wrote:
   > Any word on when the BCD396xt will be released ?

   Q1, 2009.

   --
   Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

   No Trillion-dollar blank check for crooks!

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







   E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.0.386)
   Database version: 5.11530
   http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/




E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.0.386)
Database version: 5.11530
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "JAN FINE" <janfine@...> wrote:
>
> That was some jerk that said it could be another year.
> Some people have nothing better to do with their life than be
critical.


Well, at least we know you have a sense of humor.

My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an area with a P25
simulcast system.

I have been traveling around the country and testing the BCD396T in
states where they are common.  In my testing I compare the 396 (with
firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro Saber (Mot Type II Digital)
or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25).  What I found is that the the 396 works
very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable in
simulcast areas.

My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange
County, San Diego.

It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and the 396 stops
decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.

I am confident that if the development team lived near one of these
sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how to
mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.

If they get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop
lugging single band portables around with me on planes.

Threaded...

Peter Elke wrote:
> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an area with a P25
> simulcast system.
>
> I have been traveling around the country and testing the BCD396T in
> states where they are common.  In my testing I compare the 396 (with
> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro Saber (Mot Type II Digital)
> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25).  What I found is that the the 396 works
> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable in
> simulcast areas.

That's odd. It works fine on my local P25 simulcast system.

> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange
> County, San Diego.
>
> It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and the 396 stops
> decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.

Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are you using? Although
my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that upgrades to the
firmware could have made a difference on the systems you mentioned.

What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS portable
and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when the user
radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the same.

> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of these
> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how to
> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.
>
> If they get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop
> lugging single band portables around with me on planes.

Again, maybe the answer is that it's already been done and you simply
haven't bothered to install the upgrades. You've described doing things
that you cannot do with the latest firmware.

Joe M.

The 396 works fine on the Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS that I
use the 396 for. And it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then it does have
a hiccup, but it is very much usable.

I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600 baud system. I was in the Quad
Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded garbled. I was on the move in the
vehicle, and couldn't really play around with settings much. Also, it was
STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems with the system itself.


Jason Watts
Cedar Rapids, IA
-------------- Original message from MCH <mch@...>: --------------

Threaded...

Peter Elke wrote:
> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an area with a P25
> simulcast system.
>
> I have been traveling around the country and testing the BCD396T in
> states where they are common. In my testing I compare the 396 (with
> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro Saber (Mot Type II Digital)
> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is that the the 396 works
> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable in
> simulcast areas.

That's odd. It works fine on my local P25 simulcast system.

> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange
> County, San Diego.
>
> It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and the 396 stops
> decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.

Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are you using? Although
my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that upgrades to the
firmware could have made a difference on the systems you mentioned.

What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS portable
and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when the user
radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the same.

> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of these
> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how to
> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.
>
> If they get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop
> lugging single band portables around with me on planes.

Again, maybe the answer is that it's already been done and you simply
haven't bothered to install the upgrades. You've described doing things
that you cannot do with the latest firmware.

Joe M.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific
timing, the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and
thats when you have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system.
Additionally reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more
coverage. Antenna choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you
get clean clear transmissions or not.  Also you honestly cannot compare a
$3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.

John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AM
Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems


> The 396 works fine on the Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS
> that I use the 396 for. And it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then
> it does have a hiccup, but it is very much usable.
>
> I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600 baud system. I was in the
> Quad Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded garbled. I was on the move
> in the vehicle, and couldn't really play around with settings much. Also,
> it was STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems with the system itself.
>
>
> Jason Watts
> Cedar Rapids, IA
> -------------- Original message from MCH <mch@...>: --------------
>
> Threaded...
>
> Peter Elke wrote:
>> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an area with a P25
>> simulcast system.
>>
>> I have been traveling around the country and testing the BCD396T in
>> states where they are common. In my testing I compare the 396 (with
>> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro Saber (Mot Type II Digital)
>> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is that the the 396 works
>> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable in
>> simulcast areas.
>
> That's odd. It works fine on my local P25 simulcast system.
>
>> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange
>> County, San Diego.
>>
>> It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and the 396 stops
>> decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.
>
> Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are you using? Although
> my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that upgrades to the
> firmware could have made a difference on the systems you mentioned.
>
> What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS portable
> and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when the user
> radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the same.
>
>> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of these
>> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how to
>> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.
>>
>> If they get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop
>> lugging single band portables around with me on planes.
>
> Again, maybe the answer is that it's already been done and you simply
> haven't bothered to install the upgrades. You've described doing things
> that you cannot do with the latest firmware.
>
> Joe M.
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Good explanation John.  I have the same problem as Peter described and I am also
hoping that the XT will do better.  I have tried every digital trunking scanner
on the market (RS 2096, 96 - Uniden 996, 396 - PSR 600, 500) and had mixed
results with them all.

John, is the timing problem caused by sloppy maintenance, faulty design, poor
manufacturing or global warming?



To: BCD396XT@...: johnstark@...: Wed, 21 Jan 2009
11:00:44 -0500Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems



As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific timing,
the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and thats when you
have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system. Additionally
reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more coverage. Antenna
choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you get clean clear
transmissions or not. Also you honestly cannot compare a $3000 radio to a $500
scanner.... thats just common sense.John----- Original Message ----- From:
"Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>Sent:
Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AMSubject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast
P25 systems> The 396 works fine on the Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600
Digital TRS > that I use the 396 for. And it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now
and then > it does have a hiccup, but it is very much usable.>> I have barely
tested it on a P25 Standard 9600 baud system. I was in the > Quad Cities on the
Illinois side and it sounded garbled. I was on the move > in the vehicle, and
couldn't really play around with settings much. Also, > it was STARCOM 21. I've
heard of some problems with the system itself.>>> Jason Watts> Cedar Rapids, IA>
-------------- Original message from MCH <mch@...>: -------------- >>
Threaded...>> Peter Elke wrote:>> My hope in that the Uniden development team
move to an area with a P25>> simulcast system.>>>> I have been traveling around
the country and testing the BCD396T in>> states where they are common. In my
testing I compare the 396 (with>> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro
Saber (Mot Type II Digital)>> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is that
the the 396 works>> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable
in>> simulcast areas.>> That's odd. It works fine on my local P25 simulcast
system.>>> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange>>
County, San Diego.>>>> It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and
the 396 stops>> decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.>>
Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are you using? Although> my 396
has never sounded bad, it's possible that upgrades to the> firmware could have
made a difference on the systems you mentioned.>> What's even more odd is that I
have heard anomalies on my XTS portable> and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will
sometimes, too, but when the user> radios do it too, I doubt there is anything
that would not do the same.>>> I am confident that if the development team lived
near one of these>> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover
how to>> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.>>>> If they
get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop>> lugging single
band portables around with me on planes.>> Again, maybe the answer is that it's
already been done and you simply> haven't bothered to install the upgrades.
You've described doing things> that you cannot do with the latest firmware.>>
Joe M.>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>>>
------------------------------------>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>





_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

John,


That part about the $3000 Motorola XTS and the $500 scanner comparison point you
make is a good point. I've not had opportunity to really compare audio with the
two, so I wasn't the one who brought that one up. I was just relating my
experiences with the scanner. I've had luck with the 396 in Cedar Rapids and
really look forward to getting the 396XT.


Jason W. Watts
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: johnstark
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 10:00
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems


   As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific
   timing, the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and
   thats when you have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system.
   Additionally reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more
   coverage. Antenna choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you
   get clean clear transmissions or not. Also you honestly cannot compare a
   $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.

   John

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: "Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>
   To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
   Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AM
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems

   > The 396 works fine on the Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS
   > that I use the 396 for. And it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then
   > it does have a hiccup, but it is very much usable.
   >
   > I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600 baud system. I was in the
   > Quad Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded garbled. I was on the move
   > in the vehicle, and couldn't really play around with settings much. Also,
   > it was STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems with the system itself.
   >
   >
   > Jason Watts
   > Cedar Rapids, IA
   > -------------- Original message from MCH <mch@...>: --------------
   >
   > Threaded...
   >
   > Peter Elke wrote:
   >> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an area with a P25
   >> simulcast system.
   >>
   >> I have been traveling around the country and testing the BCD396T in
   >> states where they are common. In my testing I compare the 396 (with
   >> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro Saber (Mot Type II Digital)
   >> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is that the the 396 works
   >> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost unusable in
   >> simulcast areas.
   >
   > That's odd. It works fine on my local P25 simulcast system.
   >
   >> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans, Denver, Orange
   >> County, San Diego.
   >>
   >> It is amazing how the Motorola radios never hiccup and the 396 stops
   >> decoding even after playing with the "hold key" adjustments.
   >
   > Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are you using? Although
   > my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that upgrades to the
   > firmware could have made a difference on the systems you mentioned.
   >
   > What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS portable
   > and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when the user
   > radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the same.
   >
   >> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of these
   >> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how to
   >> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.
   >>
   >> If they get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop
   >> lugging single band portables around with me on planes.
   >
   > Again, maybe the answer is that it's already been done and you simply
   > haven't bothered to install the upgrades. You've described doing things
   > that you cannot do with the latest firmware.
   >
   > Joe M.
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   > ------------------------------------
   >
   > Yahoo! Groups Links
   >
   >
   >
   >





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Given the price difference, I think the 396 does a great job. Much of
that price difference is going to be due to the transmitting abilities
of the XTS as well as some additional P25 VOCODER licensing fees, but
still, for $500 the 396 holds it's own very well.

The XTS does have better sensitivity, but that is to be expected of a
unit designed for a specific band. You cannot compare that to the broad
front end of a scanner.

It's probably better that the 396 doesn't have more sensitivity - just
ask any GRE scanner owner who travels into 'RF rich' areas. Their slight
sensitivity advantage quickly becomes a disadvantage.

Joe M.

johnstark wrote:
> Also you honestly cannot compare a
> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.
>
> John

Sloppy install to start with, and not fixing it during maintenance, gllobal
warming is a joke in my book, and it won't affect the system other than
needing better cooling in the summer. Kind of odd situation here with a P16
statewide system last week where they had to put heaters at some microwave
sites because they got too cold and failed.

John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Koch" <larrykoch@...>
To: <bcd396xt@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems



Good explanation John.  I have the same problem as Peter described and I am
also hoping that the XT will do better.  I have tried every digital trunking
scanner on the market (RS 2096, 96 - Uniden 996, 396 - PSR 600, 500) and had
mixed results with them all.

John, is the timing problem caused by sloppy maintenance, faulty design,
poor manufacturing or global warming?



To: BCD396XT@...: johnstark@...: Wed, 21 Jan
2009 11:00:44 -0500Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems



As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific
timing, the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and
thats when you have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system.
Additionally reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more
coverage. Antenna choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you
get clean clear transmissions or not. Also you honestly cannot compare a
$3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.John----- Original
Message ----- From: "Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>To:
<BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AMSubject:
Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems> The 396 works fine on the
Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS > that I use the 396 for. And
it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then > it does have a hiccup, but
it is very much usable.>> I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600
baud system. I was in the > Quad Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded
garbled. I was on the move > in the vehicle, and couldn't really play around
with settings much. Also, > it was STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems
with the system itself.>>> Jason Watts> Cedar Rapids, IA> --------------
Original message from MCH <mch@...>: -------------- >> Threaded...>>
Peter Elke wrote:>> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an
area with a P25>> simulcast system.>>>> I have been traveling around the
country and testing the BCD396T in>> states where they are common. In my
testing I compare the 396 (with>> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro
Saber (Mot Type II Digital)>> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is
that the the 396 works>> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost
unusable in>> simulcast areas.>> That's odd. It works fine on my local P25
simulcast system.>>> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans,
Denver, Orange>> County, San Diego.>>>> It is amazing how the Motorola
radios never hiccup and the 396 stops>> decoding even after playing with the
"hold key" adjustments.>> Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are
you using? Although> my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that
upgrades to the> firmware could have made a difference on the systems you
mentioned.>> What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS
portable> and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when
the user> radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the
same.>>> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of
these>> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how
to>> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.>>>> If they
get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop>> lugging single
band portables around with me on planes.>> Again, maybe the answer is that
it's already been done and you simply> haven't bothered to install the
upgrades. You've described doing things> that you cannot do with the latest
firmware.>> Joe M.>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]>>> ------------------------------------>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>





_________________________________________________________________
Windows LiveT: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

I own a PSR 600 and don't see an overload issue, but then I don't use cheap
coax too, which I believe makes a huge difference. As a test I used a
regular $29 CB antenna and it's built in coax and then my own coax and
antenna, the cheap junk got lots of interference while my setup using thin
LMR400 got none. I'd say the coax is a major contributor to problems.
Another thing I found was that with the car running, or even the key on I
got more noise as well, the cheap stuff was picking up the electrical noise
of the car.

  John


----- Original Message -----
From: "MCH" <mch@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems


> Given the price difference, I think the 396 does a great job. Much of
> that price difference is going to be due to the transmitting abilities
> of the XTS as well as some additional P25 VOCODER licensing fees, but
> still, for $500 the 396 holds it's own very well.
>
> The XTS does have better sensitivity, but that is to be expected of a
> unit designed for a specific band. You cannot compare that to the broad
> front end of a scanner.
>
> It's probably better that the 396 doesn't have more sensitivity - just
> ask any GRE scanner owner who travels into 'RF rich' areas. Their slight
> sensitivity advantage quickly becomes a disadvantage.
>
> Joe M.
>
> johnstark wrote:
>> Also you honestly cannot compare a
>> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.
>>
>> John
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

The biggest issue, and it has been stated by Upman in the past is that the
scanners are built to use the SPECIFIED timing for P25 systems, the problem
is many of the systems aren't actually using that specification and then
decoding is an issue. I don't see any scanner being able to "fix" that, it's
up to the radio system techs to bring them into spec, not Uniden or GRE for
that matter.

John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Koch" <larrykoch@...>
To: <bcd396xt@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems



Good explanation John.  I have the same problem as Peter described and I am
also hoping that the XT will do better.  I have tried every digital trunking
scanner on the market (RS 2096, 96 - Uniden 996, 396 - PSR 600, 500) and had
mixed results with them all.

John, is the timing problem caused by sloppy maintenance, faulty design,
poor manufacturing or global warming?



To: BCD396XT@...: johnstark@...: Wed, 21 Jan
2009 11:00:44 -0500Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems



As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific
timing, the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and
thats when you have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system.
Additionally reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more
coverage. Antenna choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you
get clean clear transmissions or not. Also you honestly cannot compare a
$3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.John----- Original
Message ----- From: "Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>To:
<BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AMSubject:
Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems> The 396 works fine on the
Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS > that I use the 396 for. And
it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then > it does have a hiccup, but
it is very much usable.>> I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600
baud system. I was in the > Quad Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded
garbled. I was on the move > in the vehicle, and couldn't really play around
with settings much. Also, > it was STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems
with the system itself.>>> Jason Watts> Cedar Rapids, IA> --------------
Original message from MCH <mch@...>: -------------- >> Threaded...>>
Peter Elke wrote:>> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an
area with a P25>> simulcast system.>>>> I have been traveling around the
country and testing the BCD396T in>> states where they are common. In my
testing I compare the 396 (with>> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro
Saber (Mot Type II Digital)>> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is
that the the 396 works>> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost
unusable in>> simulcast areas.>> That's odd. It works fine on my local P25
simulcast system.>>> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans,
Denver, Orange>> County, San Diego.>>>> It is amazing how the Motorola
radios never hiccup and the 396 stops>> decoding even after playing with the
"hold key" adjustments.>> Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are
you using? Although> my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that
upgrades to the> firmware could have made a difference on the systems you
mentioned.>> What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS
portable> and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when
the user> radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the
same.>>> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of
these>> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how
to>> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.>>>> If they
get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop>> lugging single
band portables around with me on planes.>> Again, maybe the answer is that
it's already been done and you simply> haven't bothered to install the
upgrades. You've described doing things> that you cannot do with the latest
firmware.>> Joe M.>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]>>> ------------------------------------>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>





_________________________________________________________________
Windows LiveT: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Other than poor connections at the connectors, how would poor coax cause
more overload? If anything better coax will have less loss resulting in
stronger signals and more overload.

Joe M.

johnstark wrote:
> I own a PSR 600 and don't see an overload issue, but then I don't use cheap
> coax too, which I believe makes a huge difference. As a test I used a
> regular $29 CB antenna and it's built in coax and then my own coax and
> antenna, the cheap junk got lots of interference while my setup using thin
> LMR400 got none. I'd say the coax is a major contributor to problems.
> Another thing I found was that with the car running, or even the key on I
> got more noise as well, the cheap stuff was picking up the electrical noise
> of the car.
>
>  John
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "MCH" <mch@...>
> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>
>
>> Given the price difference, I think the 396 does a great job. Much of
>> that price difference is going to be due to the transmitting abilities
>> of the XTS as well as some additional P25 VOCODER licensing fees, but
>> still, for $500 the 396 holds it's own very well.
>>
>> The XTS does have better sensitivity, but that is to be expected of a
>> unit designed for a specific band. You cannot compare that to the broad
>> front end of a scanner.
>>
>> It's probably better that the 396 doesn't have more sensitivity - just
>> ask any GRE scanner owner who travels into 'RF rich' areas. Their slight
>> sensitivity advantage quickly becomes a disadvantage.
>>
>> Joe M.
>>
>> johnstark wrote:
>>> Also you honestly cannot compare a
>>> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.
>>>
>>> John
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

The cheap stuff doesn't have good shielding Joe..... that allows for more
issues.

John

----- Original Message -----
From: "MCH" <mch@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems


> Other than poor connections at the connectors, how would poor coax cause
> more overload? If anything better coax will have less loss resulting in
> stronger signals and more overload.
>
> Joe M.
>
> johnstark wrote:
>> I own a PSR 600 and don't see an overload issue, but then I don't use
>> cheap
>> coax too, which I believe makes a huge difference. As a test I used a
>> regular $29 CB antenna and it's built in coax and then my own coax and
>> antenna, the cheap junk got lots of interference while my setup using
>> thin
>> LMR400 got none. I'd say the coax is a major contributor to problems.
>> Another thing I found was that with the car running, or even the key on I
>> got more noise as well, the cheap stuff was picking up the electrical
>> noise
>> of the car.
>>
>>  John
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "MCH" <mch@...>
>> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>>
>>
>>> Given the price difference, I think the 396 does a great job. Much of
>>> that price difference is going to be due to the transmitting abilities
>>> of the XTS as well as some additional P25 VOCODER licensing fees, but
>>> still, for $500 the 396 holds it's own very well.
>>>
>>> The XTS does have better sensitivity, but that is to be expected of a
>>> unit designed for a specific band. You cannot compare that to the broad
>>> front end of a scanner.
>>>
>>> It's probably better that the 396 doesn't have more sensitivity - just
>>> ask any GRE scanner owner who travels into 'RF rich' areas. Their slight
>>> sensitivity advantage quickly becomes a disadvantage.
>>>
>>> Joe M.
>>>
>>> johnstark wrote:
>>>> Also you honestly cannot compare a
>>>> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

It's not the timing that is the problem - it's the deviation of the
signal. Too many systems are too far out of spec. If they all were
perfect, the setting of '8' would have worked fine on all systems. Still
the same causes... sloppy installation/maintenance.

Global warming is very real. It happens in cycles. We happen to be in
the higher part of a cycle right now. The increased solar activity might
have something to do with it, too. We gotta stop making the sun hotter!
;-> (as if we've ever done anything to cause any changes to the sun...)

As far as us *causing* global warming, I agree - mostly cow doo-doo.
Although there is a valid argument about there being more people living
on the planet right now than ever before. That could cause warming, too
- much like getting a large number of people in a room - even in the
winter you need to run the A/C or open some windows. But, the only
solution to that is to kill people. I don't think many would agree that
is a viable option.

But I digress...

Joe M.

johnstark wrote:
> The biggest issue, and it has been stated by Upman in the past is that the
> scanners are built to use the SPECIFIED timing for P25 systems, the problem
> is many of the systems aren't actually using that specification and then
> decoding is an issue. I don't see any scanner being able to "fix" that, it's
> up to the radio system techs to bring them into spec, not Uniden or GRE for
> that matter.
>
> John
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Koch" <larrykoch@...>
> To: <bcd396xt@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:21 AM
> Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>
>
>
> Good explanation John.  I have the same problem as Peter described and I am
> also hoping that the XT will do better.  I have tried every digital trunking
> scanner on the market (RS 2096, 96 - Uniden 996, 396 - PSR 600, 500) and had
> mixed results with them all.
>
> John, is the timing problem caused by sloppy maintenance, faulty design,
> poor manufacturing or global warming?
>
>
>
> To: BCD396XT@...: johnstark@...: Wed, 21 Jan
> 2009 11:00:44 -0500Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>
>
>
> As has been said before each P25 is supposed to be set up with specific
> timing, the problem is many systems are not set up within the specs and
> thats when you have decode problems, it's multiplied on a simulcast system.
> Additionally reception is differents too, lower power for the same, or more
> coverage. Antenna choice, even weather make huge differences in whether you
> get clean clear transmissions or not. Also you honestly cannot compare a
> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.John----- Original
> Message ----- From: "Jason W. Watts, KB0KGH" <KB0KGH@...>To:
> <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:23 AMSubject:
> Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems> The 396 works fine on the
> Cedar Rapids Motorola Type II 3600 Digital TRS > that I use the 396 for. And
> it is a 2 site simulcast system. Now and then > it does have a hiccup, but
> it is very much usable.>> I have barely tested it on a P25 Standard 9600
> baud system. I was in the > Quad Cities on the Illinois side and it sounded
> garbled. I was on the move > in the vehicle, and couldn't really play around
> with settings much. Also, > it was STARCOM 21. I've heard of some problems
> with the system itself.>>> Jason Watts> Cedar Rapids, IA> --------------
> Original message from MCH <mch@...>: -------------- >> Threaded...>>
> Peter Elke wrote:>> My hope in that the Uniden development team move to an
> area with a P25>> simulcast system.>>>> I have been traveling around the
> country and testing the BCD396T in>> states where they are common. In my
> testing I compare the 396 (with>> firware v2.9 and 3.01) with ether an Astro
> Saber (Mot Type II Digital)>> or an XTS2500 (for 100% P25). What I found is
> that the the 396 works>> very well on single transmitter sites and is almost
> unusable in>> simulcast areas.>> That's odd. It works fine on my local P25
> simulcast system.>>> My testing was in Minneapolis, Detroit, New Orleans,
> Denver, Orange>> County, San Diego.>>>> It is amazing how the Motorola
> radios never hiccup and the 396 stops>> decoding even after playing with the
> "hold key" adjustments.>> Hold key adjustments? What version of firmware are
> you using? Although> my 396 has never sounded bad, it's possible that
> upgrades to the> firmware could have made a difference on the systems you
> mentioned.>> What's even more odd is that I have heard anomalies on my XTS
> portable> and XTL mobiles. Granted, the 396 will sometimes, too, but when
> the user> radios do it too, I doubt there is anything that would not do the
> same.>>> I am confident that if the development team lived near one of
> these>> sites (and lived with the results daily) they would discover how
> to>> mathematically work out the trick of multipath decoding.>>>> If they
> get this right I will buy both a 396XT and a 996XT and stop>> lugging single
> band portables around with me on planes.>> Again, maybe the answer is that
> it's already been done and you simply> haven't bothered to install the
> upgrades. You've described doing things> that you cannot do with the latest
> firmware.>> Joe M.>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]>>> ------------------------------------>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows LiveT: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.
> http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Yes, it can allow for additional signal loss and signal ingress, but
compared to the 'ingress' at the antenna it's negligible. I just don't
see the relationship that poor coax = more overload. If anything, the
signal loss would reduce the overload potential.

There is a valid argument that better coax = more overload since there
would be more signal present.

Joe M.

johnstark wrote:
> The cheap stuff doesn't have good shielding Joe..... that allows for more
> issues.
>
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "MCH" <mch@...>
> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>
>
>> Other than poor connections at the connectors, how would poor coax cause
>> more overload? If anything better coax will have less loss resulting in
>> stronger signals and more overload.
>>
>> Joe M.
>>
>> johnstark wrote:
>>> I own a PSR 600 and don't see an overload issue, but then I don't use
>>> cheap
>>> coax too, which I believe makes a huge difference. As a test I used a
>>> regular $29 CB antenna and it's built in coax and then my own coax and
>>> antenna, the cheap junk got lots of interference while my setup using
>>> thin
>>> LMR400 got none. I'd say the coax is a major contributor to problems.
>>> Another thing I found was that with the car running, or even the key on I
>>> got more noise as well, the cheap stuff was picking up the electrical
>>> noise
>>> of the car.
>>>
>>>  John
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "MCH" <mch@...>
>>> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:33 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Decoding simulcast P25 systems
>>>
>>>
>>>> Given the price difference, I think the 396 does a great job. Much of
>>>> that price difference is going to be due to the transmitting abilities
>>>> of the XTS as well as some additional P25 VOCODER licensing fees, but
>>>> still, for $500 the 396 holds it's own very well.
>>>>
>>>> The XTS does have better sensitivity, but that is to be expected of a
>>>> unit designed for a specific band. You cannot compare that to the broad
>>>> front end of a scanner.
>>>>
>>>> It's probably better that the 396 doesn't have more sensitivity - just
>>>> ask any GRE scanner owner who travels into 'RF rich' areas. Their slight
>>>> sensitivity advantage quickly becomes a disadvantage.
>>>>
>>>> Joe M.
>>>>
>>>> johnstark wrote:
>>>>> Also you honestly cannot compare a
>>>>> $3000 radio to a $500 scanner.... thats just common sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> John
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market that is
capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343 trunking
network.

The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered by
today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been around
since 1988.

Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in the
park considering all the other things scanners can do today including all the
other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and following.


Regards
Wayne

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Common? Not common here or anywhere I have traveled the past couple years.
It's more common overseas though. Here in Indiana we have a total of two
businesses that use it, and I don't know of any public safety systems in the
States who use it so it can't be too common.

John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343


> How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market
> that is capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343
> trunking network.
>
> The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered by
> today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been
> around since 1988.
>
> Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in
> the park considering all the other things scanners can do today including
> all the other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and
> following.
>
>
> Regards
> Wayne
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Note the original poster's email address, John.



He's from Australia, where it *IS* common.





________________

Dan Danz (WA5SKM)

Fountain Hills AZ



From: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
johnstark
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:54 PM
To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343



Common? Not common here or anywhere I have traveled the past couple years.
It's more common overseas though. Here in Indiana we have a total of two
businesses that use it, and I don't know of any public safety systems in the
States who use it so it can't be too common.

John

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@... <mailto:turbine_prop%40yahoo.com.au> >
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BCD396XT%40yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343

> How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market
> that is capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343
> trunking network.
>
> The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered by
> today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been
> around since 1988.
>
> Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in
> the park considering all the other things scanners can do today including
> all the other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and
> following.
>
>
> Regards
> Wayne
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thank you Dan it's is also very widely used both in the U.K. and right through
Europe.

Regards
Wayne.

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Dan Danz
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 8:56 AM
   Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343


   Note the original poster's email address, John.

   He's from Australia, where it *IS* common.

   ________________

   Dan Danz (WA5SKM)

   Fountain Hills AZ

   From: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
   johnstark
   Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:54 PM
   To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343

   Common? Not common here or anywhere I have traveled the past couple years.
   It's more common overseas though. Here in Indiana we have a total of two
   businesses that use it, and I don't know of any public safety systems in the
   States who use it so it can't be too common.

   John

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@... <mailto:turbine_prop%40yahoo.com.au>
>
   To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BCD396XT%40yahoogroups.com> >
   Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:27 PM
   Subject: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343

   > How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market
   > that is capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343
   > trunking network.
   >
   > The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered by
   > today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been
   > around since 1988.
   >
   > Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in
   > the park considering all the other things scanners can do today including
   > all the other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and
   > following.
   >
   >
   > Regards
   > Wayne
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   > ------------------------------------
   >
   > Yahoo! Groups Links
   >
   >
   >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Note what I said about OVERSEAS too Joe

SHEESH!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Danz" <dan.danz@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:56 PM
Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343


> Note the original poster's email address, John.
>
>
>
> He's from Australia, where it *IS* common.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________
>
> Dan Danz (WA5SKM)
>
> Fountain Hills AZ
>
>
>
> From: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of
> johnstark
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:54 PM
> To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343
>
>
>
> Common? Not common here or anywhere I have traveled the past couple years.
> It's more common overseas though. Here in Indiana we have a total of two
> businesses that use it, and I don't know of any public safety systems in
> the
> States who use it so it can't be too common.
>
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@...
> <mailto:turbine_prop%40yahoo.com.au> >
> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BCD396XT%40yahoogroups.com> >
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:27 PM
> Subject: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343
>
>> How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market
>> that is capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343
>> trunking network.
>>
>> The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered
>> by
>> today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been
>> around since 1988.
>>
>> Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in
>> the park considering all the other things scanners can do today including
>> all the other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and
>> following.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Wayne
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Sorry, thought ot was Joe... Dan re-read what I said...


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Danz" <dan.danz@...>
To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:56 PM
Subject: RE: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343


> Note the original poster's email address, John.
>
>
>
> He's from Australia, where it *IS* common.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________
>
> Dan Danz (WA5SKM)
>
> Fountain Hills AZ
>
>
>
> From: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of
> johnstark
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:54 PM
> To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343
>
>
>
> Common? Not common here or anywhere I have traveled the past couple years.
> It's more common overseas though. Here in Indiana we have a total of two
> businesses that use it, and I don't know of any public safety systems in
> the
> States who use it so it can't be too common.
>
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wayne" <turbine_prop@...
> <mailto:turbine_prop%40yahoo.com.au> >
> To: <BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BCD396XT%40yahoogroups.com> >
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:27 PM
> Subject: [BCD396XT] MPT 1327 / 1343
>
>> How's about Uniden make the 396XT to be the first scanner on the market
>> that is capable of receiving and following the Motorola MPT 1327 / 1343
>> trunking network.
>>
>> The MPT network seems to be the only trunked system that is not covered
>> by
>> today's scanners and yet it is so widley used it's as common as it's been
>> around since 1988.
>>
>> Surley it's not hard for a new scanner to do this it should be a walk in
>> the park considering all the other things scanners can do today including
>> all the other trunking network they are capable of monitoring and
>> following.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Wayne
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

According to a quick search I've done on Google MPT trunking is used in 85
countries of the world I'd say that's a pretty big chunk of the world and a good
reason for Uniden to include it in a new high end trunking scanner.

http://www.mpt1327-usa.org/introduction.htm

http://www.google.com.au/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aoffic\
ial&channel=s&hl=en&q=countries+that+use+mpt+trunking&meta=&btnG=Google+Search


Regards
Wayne

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]