This is a year and a half later, and the price of my PSR-800 from GRE was about $380, as opposed to the $500 or so for the Home Patrol,
which basically does the same things.

Is it worth it:? With weekly updates from RadioReference, and easy updating of the firmware and software, when compared to the PRO-95 I had
before the PSR-800, in my view the answer is yes.

Toronto was relatively easy to program, even if, because it is in Canada, one cannot just enter a zip code and let it pull in everything
that might be relevant. In Houston one enters a zip code such as 77030 and it runs with that and installs, from scan list 150 upwards,
everything it thinks relevant for Houston and nearby parts of Texas. No such ability for Canada and Canadian cities, but it still has all
the RadioReference lists for all of Canada

The sound is definitely better than the PRO-95, also built by GRE. The use of a microSD card and the built in tap, etc. all make it worth it
in my view.

Will it handle non-standard encryption? No, but if you can find software that will do the job, a feed from the stereo earphone plug to the
computer's microphone in plug permits you to run the intercept to the computer.

Anyway, I have a few minor issues but in the main I rather like the PSR-800, its ability to record transmissions as received, and its
relative ease of use and control.

FWIW
RsH


On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 08:33:23 -0800 (PST), Kidd Joe wrote:

I’m just fishing for some honest opinions here before I drop $500 on a
new scanner. I recently sold an unblocked AOL MKIII I bought in 2004,
because it became basically useless for the purpose of full coverage
scanning. I never lost my fascination for the hobby, so I’m
considering a Home Patrol (or a Pro-106) to at least enjoy the trunk
tracking capability it didn‘t have.

The problem for me is that with all this encrypting going on, is it
really worth the money? I mean how much longer can I take advantage of
casual eavesdropping before I end up with an expensive paper weight I
can‘t use for anything else? That’s why I’d appreciate your take on
it.

Thank You.

The bottom line is - not everyone is as compute savy as you are.
There really is some stupid people out there in this world.
It's easier for them - TODAY - to just punch in the zip code and have the radio program itself then for them to actually research the bands and have to do some work.

The problem is - PUBLIC SAFETY is in a constant state of flux.
Just because this is the frequencies used today - does not mean they will be the same frequencies used tomorrow.

Pennsylvania is a very prime example.

The State Police were on the VHF portion of the band 154 - 156 MHz and still are in some locations such as McKeon and Potter county - where digital modes - one stick every mile on a telephone pole just doesn't work - the hills are too steep and the valleys too deep to get good digital penetration from the 800 MHz equipment presently being used.

The Fire Departments has migrated from the low band - 46 MHz to 155.730 county dispatch to the 460 - 470 MHz..
However - places such as Indiana county still uses their old 33 MHz - and are going to be screwed when it comes time to switch to narrow band and a higher more compatiable frequency - because they probably use 3 or 4 towers now to fulfill their obligation to cover the whole county and will have to double the amount of repeater sites to do the same thing - if possible on 460 MHz.

When you have Rossiter on the northern end of the county - down in a deep valley, you cannot talk simplex to Indiana PA or Commodore or Creekside or Homer City or Blairsville PA.

The only thing the FCC will be able to do is grant them a extension until they can find a better way of doing it with the available equipment.
Most all equipment made after 1994 - I believe has the capability if being narrowbanded - so most equipment made before 1994 is probably been taken out of service.

The problem with their equipment is - it cannot be easily modified to work on higher frequencies - which means each and every fire company and repeater would need all new equipment.

I believe it was President Harry S. Truman that said it is a recession when your neighbor looses his job and it is a depression when you loose your job.

In a down economy - where very little support is being given to volunteer fire companies - it is hard to tell a bunch of people working out of their own pockets that they have to buy new radios and equipment.

The State Police operates on a outdated system called OPEN SKY - which already has a updated number - like going from windows 98 to windows XP...
It won't be long before they have to have another update.
And it is a proprietary type system - hence you can't listen to it anyways.

So how do you program a scanner - with general coverage - that can do all of this?

And my other question is - what about amateur radio?

Most scanners already does 140 MHz and 440 MHz - but no one thinks of including those frequencies into the pre programmed bands.
And, even if they did, they run the risk of repeaters being shut off, repeaters being moved to a different frequency and repeater frequencies being hyjacked by gas company monitoring systems or harmonic's of other public use frequenices harmonic's over powering those frequencies.

Most of the low band equipment being taken off the air here - was sold to other less populated places such as Montana and Idaho - where the population is spread out and where a good low band radio will out talk a better VHF / UHF radio..
It is more practical for those people to still use 33 - 48 MHz for their communications needs.

The whole pre programmed scheme is doomed to fail.

And people who subscribe to that type of service, and then wants only certain type of things on their radios will never be satisfied because each time the power goes out and each time they unplug it - they run the risk of loosing everything that was programmed and you will have to keep coming back again and reprogramming their radio for them.

The bottom line is - give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man HOW to FISH and he will eat for a lifetime.

I don't accept people who says they are old or crippled and cannot do something to be a valid reason to do things for them.
If they want to listen - make them learn how to operate it and let them program it on their own.
We need to stop catering to these dumb people and start educating these people and make them more productive.

I go through this all the time with amateur radio operators who does not know how to program their own radio and only talks simplex because they don't have to program in the offset and PL...
That in my book is called the CB radio - not ham radio...

On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 13:17:13 -0700, The Other Guy wrote:

On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:45:10 -0400, R S H wrote:

This is a year and a half later, and the price of my PSR-800 from GRE was about $380, as opposed to the $500 or so for the Home Patrol,
which basically does the same things.

Is it worth it:?

You need to add $100 to the Home Patrol to get the 'extra' features.

But it REALLY isn't THAT hard to program a scanner, even a trunking
scanner.

And by doing it yourself, you get what YOU WANT, and not just some
huge mishmash of stuff JUST because it's something you CAN hear in
your area.

I programmed a Home Patrol for a handicapped person, who was VERY set
in what he wanted.

I used the zip code process, and ended up spending 5 times as long as
usual DELETING things he didn't want and would never listen to, as I
would have doing it the normal way from scratch.

If he had a 396 or 996, it would have taken my 5 minutes or less to
adjust my programming and flash his radio.

In Canada one cannot use the zip code method, which on the PSR-800 fills in scanlists starting at 150 so still leaves the first 149 empty.
[Tried the for Houson's 77030, so found out]... So it is relatively easy to go through the lists and change the scanlist number to an empty
lower one, such as 1 or 2 or whatever you have not used for those specific things you want to keep, then delete all of the rest via a CTRL-A
and then a delete, should you want to go that route. In Canada you are forced to be more selective to begin with, since you need to pick
Canada, Province, County and then go down from there, in the main.

So I agree that the ZIP code process is a bit of overkill as it seems to pull in all of Texas if you use a Houston zip code, but it is still
easy to strip it down in the PSR-800 IF you want to do that. I suspect it is simpler to just go to Houston and pick what you want from the
available choices. That is what I did for my part of Canada.

RsH