Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
12 November 2012, 07:56,
#51
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
(11 November 2012, 15:07)The Local Ned Wrote: Good Work LS.

Changing all the ch and freq manually is a bit of a chore on the handset , but it is easy enough to pick up and learn.

VIP is the standard software that is sometimes bundled with it , it can also be easily downloaded , there are 2 versions available depending on what version of firmware is on your handset.

I DONT KNOW IF THIS IS VALID OR NOT , PLEASE CHECK ONLINE BEFORE YOU TRY AND SAVE THESE SETUPS ONTO YOUR HANDSET , DEPENDING ON YOUR FIRMWARE THEY MAY NOT BE COMPATIBLE.

I am currently looking into this online to see if its the case.

CHIRP is an excellent bit of software and is continually upgraded , it opens up even more capabilities on the radio , some have had success with 27Mhz , 520Mhz being available for receive only on it I am led to believe.

TLN.

Cheers TLN

As you know I invested before the UV5r was released and use the FD 880, so cannot beta test the images myself.

Compatibility is an issue. If you can check and update us that'd be brilliant.

Thanks OM

LS
72 de

Lightspeed
26-SUKer-17

26-TM-580


STATUS: Bugged-In at the Bug-Out
Reply
15 November 2012, 14:46,
#52
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
Ver BFB 251 on mine.

I'll load the images up and see if they're stable...wait out.

Trying very hard not to be paranoid.....and it aint getting easier.
Reply
15 November 2012, 14:52,
#53
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
Thanks TLN

I tested both images on the UV-5Rplus, BFB 291, and both images worked fine, it would be good to know if they are backwards compatible with earlier versions.

I think there is now a newer version, BFB293, available - it would be good if any members have this or a later version and could also test the images for forwards compatibility.
73 de
OSR

The duty of a true patriot is to protect his country from its government ~ Thomas Paine
Reply
15 November 2012, 19:54,
#54
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
Ok , here's my take on the list after trying both images on my handset.

Smile They both work fine.

One thing I did notice was , although all the 'naughty if caught on them' , channels were disabled on the pre SHTF image , there was a few channels with high power already enabled ?

Also - on my own handset I had the SOS / CGRD freq on CH99 , just as a nod to the '999' service , in an emergency pressing '9's seems the right thing for me...just a quirk of mine.

CH16 - 'RF noisy' for me , CHS' - 20,50,70,80 and 81 likewise.
CHS' 92 and 99 were 'busy' also , with faint RF.

One question - It seemed as though there was a split with the deviation between the bands - Narrow on 70cm and Wide on 2m ?
-I have all of mine set for narrow , as I thought that the wide setting was for channels that required extra bandwidth for 'broadcast' comms ?

All in all , a good effort from ALL involved.

On a side note - I'm just looking at CHIRP , and it has options for -

-EU , LPD and PMR.
-MARINE VHF.
-NOAA Weather Alert ( USA - I know ).
-U.S - 60m
-U.S - FRS GMRS MURS.

..and U.S calling frequencies already setup as options to load.

Might be worthwhile keeping an eye on that for future developments.
Trying very hard not to be paranoid.....and it aint getting easier.
Reply
15 November 2012, 21:00,
#55
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
Hi TLN

Could your squelch need adjusting? Mine is set to level 3 and I don't get any background noise.

Re 2m, I was told at my Foundation Licence class that Wide is standard on 2m for ham radio use.

Re channels set to high, I think these are either calling channels or distress channels, where High would be standard for intial contact.

I hope the above is correct and helps to explain the settings.
73 de
OSR

The duty of a true patriot is to protect his country from its government ~ Thomas Paine
Reply
15 November 2012, 21:49,
#56
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
TLN, you mention MARINE VHF.
Which one, UK or international aka American?

Reply
15 November 2012, 22:20, (This post was last modified: 15 November 2012, 22:26 by The Local Ned.)
#57
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
TBH Paul I have no idea , BB would probably be the best man to ask what the usual UK maritime freqs are mate.

I would assume that those (configs avail in CHIRP software) are international though.

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

Gary - squelch is fine mate - it is at 2 , what I meant was that the RF noises - although signal weak, were audio strong.
It isn't a problem in the slightest , just thought I'd mention it as an addition to the post.


On the NFM / FM thing , I thought it may be something like that.
Trying very hard not to be paranoid.....and it aint getting easier.
Reply
15 November 2012, 22:49, (This post was last modified: 15 November 2012, 22:52 by Paul.)
#58
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
TLD.
Could you just check the following freq's for me on your marine channels.

Channel 16 (156.800 MHz) UK/US international Calling and Distress (Simplex only)
Channel 67 (156.375 MHz) UK Small Ship Safety Channel (Simplex only) **** important to me****
Channel 70 (156.525 MHz) UK/US international DCS

Cheers, Paul

Whoops forgot
Channel 0 (156.000 MHz) UK Coast Guard

Reply
16 November 2012, 20:29,
#59
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
All channels available mate , on a simple keypad freq dial-up they all worked straight off the bat.

For anyone else interested - here's a link to a comparison to U.S , UK and international freqs.

Marine VHF comparison
Trying very hard not to be paranoid.....and it aint getting easier.
Reply
16 November 2012, 21:38,
#60
RE: SUK HT PROGRAMMING PROTOCOL (proposal)
Just as a point to note - I am nowhere near coastal.

Marine comms traffic is not within my current comms capability at my location.
What I meant was ,the radio accepted the channel freq and was able to transmit on all.

Sorry for any confusion.
Trying very hard not to be paranoid.....and it aint getting easier.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)