Tom in Cincy

My Feedback: (16)

Thanks Apteryx for the posts. I never got a E-mail notice that you had responded to my post. I gave up on the 100XLT. I found a site in Europe that had a board layout and tried to modify it to be as theirs but it never did allow me to program in 72mhz. However I got one off E-BAy http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...DME:L:AAQ:US:1 and had it modified in an hour. One note; on mine pin 1&2 on the CPU were factory shorted. I went ahead an undid them. Seems to work just fine.

Thanks again
Great thread

Tom P.

apteryx

If you broke pin 1 off what you can sometimes do with a magnifier is pick a little of the plastic case away with an X-acto knife tip and using some good solder flux, attach a small #30 wire to the remaining stub.

Capt Jim

My Feedback: (168)

I've picked up a Uniden...done the mods...very clear instructions, thanks...all was successful. At the field, the range appears to be only slightly better than the Hobbico scanner unit. I am wondering what the sensitivity spec is on the Uniden, and also on our R/C receivers. I hope the r/c receivers hear our transmitters much better than either the hobbico or uniden scanners...and apparently they do, because we regularly fly quite far beyond the demonstrated range of these scanner units. That said, both are handy gadgets to have at the field, and thanks very much for the detailed mod's. Now...how about a little RF power amplifier for the Tx? heh heh...Hey FCC, I'm just kidding...but it would be nice to be able to override interference.
Jim

Tom in Cincy

My Feedback: (16)

I noticed the same thing and was really dissappointed. Some of it may be the stubby antenna is so misstuned @ 72mhz.
But basically it performs very very poorly. Horrible sensitivity, horrible image rejection, pretty much useless.

Capt Jim

My Feedback: (168)

At our local fields, we are experiencing quite a number of "claimed" radio hits. My interest in the Uniden was in being able to hear the signal and help to identify it. Obviously the FM signal sounds different from PCM, etc, but if I hear voice on our channels, I know it is not our radios doing it. I have just recently heard that some commercial communication devices, possibly like walkie-talkies, operate somewhere on 72 mhz. Voice communicators would explain the apparently very randon, and short duration, of the interference. I did hope for better range though....maybe with a longer antenna? Oh well, just another fun gadget, for us gadget freaks.
jim

Volfy

My Feedback: (23)

I have the ham HT version of the ICOM R2 (forgot what model number). I got it programmed for all the RC frequencies, including ham band 50 MHz. BTW, ICOM is up to R5 now, so you should be able to find the old models on Ebay cheap.

I don't bring the ICOM to the field much any more. It was fun at first, but got boring real fast. I fly at "private" RC club fields that are far from crowded, and most members are well-mannered. There is the "public" Scobee field here in Houston. It is more of a zoo and where a scanner might be of better frequent use, but that's the precise reason I don't fly there.

The RC specific scanners are better suited for general club use. Every club should buy one and permanently affix it to the frequency fllag/pin stand.

For personal use, the general purpose scanners (Bearcat, ICOM, etc.) is a better buy. I used to amuse myself by listening in on my neighbor's cordless phone conversations. The teenagers' endless rants are the juiciest. These days with two young ones myself, I don't have time for such voyeurisms, but the baby monitor still picks up the same 800MHz signals every once in a while.

Tom in Cincy

My Feedback: (16)

I bought a used Icom R2 last week on Ebay. It works great. Very good sensitivity.
The R2 is the way to go.