# Scanners



## Ed (Jul 26, 2015)

What is a good scanner to take on the train?


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Jul 26, 2015)

I carry a Uniden Bearcat BC95XLT I picked up new for just under $100 a few years ago. I replaced the included Rubber Duckie antenna with a "beefed up" one that is suppose to be better tuned. And be sure to throw in an earplug or set of phones.

I took about 30 minutes when I first got it and programmed in the 100 or so AAR Frequencies; so I can quickly change channel.


----------



## PVD (Jul 26, 2015)

I have a BC75XLT which is pretty similar but it doesn't have the 800 MHz frequencies that the 95 does. They aren't used on the rails, so that was not a problem for me. There are a couple of websites that will list the channels used on different routes, you can set up a bank for a trip or let it search the whole AAR block. Or lock a specific frequency for an area you are in, or if traversing a yard, that may be more interesting than "road". The choices are almost endless, and you get to do what you like. I would suggest using an earpiece or lightweight headset, even in a roomette.


----------



## Acela150 (Aug 11, 2015)

The worst part about scanners is that even with their antennas they pick up way more then my radio that NS gave me..


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 11, 2015)

Acela150 said:


> The worst part about scanners is that even with their antennas they pick up way more then my radio that NS gave me..


Thats odd as scanners are wide as a barn door on there RX circuits and this often leads to sensitivity issues .

a mono band-er HT is as tight and tuned as physics can get aside from kiddy FRS stuff .


----------



## mmcpparties (Aug 20, 2015)

Can you use a website instead of a scanner


----------



## TinCan782 (Aug 20, 2015)

mmcpparties said:


> Can you use a website instead of a scanner


You can but, severely limited ...you need internet access (wireless, wifi, etc.) and, the areas being covered do not necessarily correspond with your route of travel. Take a look at the app "Scanner Radio" and look at RR feeds are available. Also, there is usually a delay of several seconds between what you hear and when the tranmission was made. A $100 or so scanner (the so-called NASCAR scanner) will serve you much better in this application.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 21, 2015)

I had a Radio Shack Pro-XX something or other for a few years. I rarely used it and then one day I simply couldn't find it again. Hopefully whoever has it now is getting more use out of it than I did. I was looking for a replacement a couple weeks ago and picked up the Uniden Bearcat BC125AT. Is a Bearcat anything like a Jackalope? Anyway, several stores had it for less than a Benjamin and so far I've been pretty happy with the size and general functionality. I enjoy being able to give each channel a readable name that's easy to remember and I enjoy being able to program and wipe all 500 channels from the computer. I also like that it uses a standard mini USB cable both for programming and charging. The antenna seems to be kind of weak though. Anybody have a good suggestion for a better general use antenna with rail focused communications?


----------



## caravanman (Aug 21, 2015)

Antenna's in an ideal world would be a certain size to match the wavelengths (frequency) in use.

A wideband scanner covers such a great range that the helical "rubber duck" is pretty much a compromise.

A longer antenna is not going to be better than a shorter one, if it is not a match to wavelength.

If you can decide the frequency band that you use most, you can ask a ham radio shop for an antenna to match.

The old fashioned telescopic antenna will allow you to play around with length for best results... but above 700MHZ it needs to retract to just a few inches to match.

Having said all that, the antenna match is much more critical when transmitting than receiving.

Ed.


----------



## willem (Aug 21, 2015)

caravanman said:


> Having said all that, the antenna match is much more critical when transmitting than receiving.


Thanks! I had heard about the importance of matching antenna length to wavelength ("There's a lot more physics involved than just mounting a CB antenna on each side of the cab"), but I hadn't heard that it's more important for transmission.


----------



## caravanman (Aug 22, 2015)

Broadly speaking, the transmitter needs to "match in" to the antenna to transfer maximum power into the antenna. The antenna will "reflect back" some power if it is the wrong match for the frequency in use. This reduces signal output, and can damage the transmitter in some cases. On receive, a signal will probably be heard weakly on a poor match antenna, and no damage will be done. There is much more lea-way on receive.

Ed.


----------

