> The point of Control Channel trunking is that you can trunk an
> entire system and only use up one channel in memory to do it. If
> you wanted the entire system programmed, you might as well
> program it the old way and then lose 5-20+ memory channels.I guess I fail to see the object of the point being made here.
I already think that 50 channel banks are a waste, in a way.
Sure, they have to be made for everyone and to support the largest
trunked system while leaving space available for conventional
freqs leads to a larger bank size. Personally, for the few times
I do use trunked and conventional together, I only have about
15 channel trunked systems and use another 5-10 freqs. I simply
don't have a need for the 12 or 13 extra channels I'd gain by
only programming in the control channels for this special mode.
If the 780 used dynamic bank sizing, I'd agree with you. Perhaps
others will chime in with their usage but I don't see the benefit
for most of us.
> Most public safety systems have been fully "vetted" so the working channel (and control channel)
> frequencies are already known. Also, I find in public safety here in Massachusetts that control
> channels are no longer rotated. I know that's not the case in all areas, but it's not hard to
> determine what the few possibilities are.
The goal of my earlier posting was to help to "dispel" the
myths that I've seen arising from the wishful thinking of those
who've read the brochures but not actually used the radio. My
initial impressions and I'm sure others as well, were that you
programmed in ONE control channel and the radio did all the rest
for you. Not so. You basically have to know all of the frequencies
(to choose the proper PLAN for effective tracking) and you have
to have some knowledge of the system, in some cases, of what the
control channel frequencies are (so this feature will continue to
work as these channels roll-over as they still do in some areas).
With that said, I might as well just program in all the
frequencies as usual since, for me, I don't see the benefit or
feel the need to save on channels as mentioned above.
> If you really want to learn all the frequencies in the system and then program it, there are two
> ways to do it: First, simply jot them down as the voice channels appear on the display. Yes, it
> takes a little work, but it's not a huge deal. Second, you can run Winscan which will log all the
> working channel hits and auto program them if you like.
Most people won't go the WinScan route and it's not really an
option for most mobile users. I have been using WinScan and am
very impressed with the support in this area as you say. It's
doing several things that the BC780 isn't capable of on its own
and speaks well of a thought out piece of software. Again, I don't
think most owners will benefit from this simply because they
won't go the computer control route and if they do, they might
choose a different vendor's product which might not be as
friendly.
> I've been using the feature to determine what channels make-up the many 900 MHz SMRs in
> greater Boston.
This would be an obvious benefit which I have not explored.
> I do like to then program all the working and control channels
> in and then trunk normally at times (I do like those dancing
> lights which you don't get in cc-only mode).
So, you admit to wasting channels for the sake of appearances?
How professional is that! ;-)
> Regarding the four plans, Greg Knox can speak to this issue much more intelligently than me, but
> my understanding is that its just a requirement of control channel trunking. It's not as though the
> software engineers skimped on this and had you do something that you shouldn't have to do.
> Think of it like a Fleet Map. Just a fact of life that it's required.
I was only telling how it worked, Rich, and not implying that
anyone was slacking off when this was designed and/or implemented.
I simply pointed out the knowledge of the system what would be
neccesary to use this feature productively. Nothing more, nothing
less. Again, it was to dispel the myths I have seen developing
regarding control channel only tracking which is a simplified
fire-and-forget type mentality born of naivette.
> In 800 MHz, the default plan is almost always used. Most importantly, you just have to
> know a few frequencies within the system if you suspect that an alternate plan may be required,
> you don't really have to know them all.
Well, we shall have to agree to disagree here. The second system
I decided to try this feature on was an exception to the rule. I
had to use Plan 2 (according to the rules in the manual). And
after looking at the plan rules, I don't think many will go away
with the idea that they don't need to know all of the frequencies
to properly track their 800 MHz system.
> I agree it would've been slick if you could've just put the scanner into search, found a control
> channel, and began trunking
So, when is the BC785XLT coming out? ;-)
> but this is much more complicated from a software perspective than
> it may seem. Perhaps one day this will be possible by external software.
Well, as a computer engineer working in embedded, real-time systems
night and day, anything that can be done in software can be done
in firmware (for full functionality you'll need to think about
adding a color LCD to mimic the PC interface display)! Bring on
the programmable FPGAs and ASICs! (Just let me know if you need
any help in this area ;-)