Watson W889 & 3500XLT

Subject: Watson W889 & 3500XLT 2009-03-15, 11:39

After having the scanner for just over a year (one of the first ones in the country :) ) I'm struggling with it. I've followed all the advice about programming in the freqs using bctool - systems, groups, band plan 3 etc and am using the 'easier to read' online manual. The trouble is that even with the same freqs dialled in, another 3500XLT along side me is picking up far more, much quicker than I am (exact same settings).

I have reset the scanner a few times, created new spreadsheets and optimised the settings for the best reception possible so I know I must be missing something! So I reckon it's time to change the aerial. OK, don't all shout at once, I know it can't be just the aerial but I've read good things about the Watson W889 telescopic when attached to other scanners and wanted some feedback on pairing it up with the 3500XLT? Anybody got the combo and how much better does the scanner perform with the W889 over the supplied aerial?

Any feedback would be appreciated. Ta.

Al

PS - if some kind soul has a spreadsheet with all the UK frequencies, I could always try that? :)

Location : St.Ives, Cambridgeshire

Al, I have the 889 + 3500. I felt it made quite a difference over the supplied aerial. I have to say it's not something I'd use at home though only when out and about at airshows etc.

Andrew

Location : Humberston, NE LINCS

Al

Just a quick thought - are you 'locking out' the bases/frequencies that you don't need to listen too.
This will speed up the scan times for the frequencies you want to hear.
You might have already tried this. Opps

Also, using the scanner at home use the guide above to make your own aerial and mount it on the roof
I have found mine to be very good :) .

Cheers Paul.

Subject: Re: Watson W889 & 3500XLT 2009-03-15, 15:36

Thanks for the replies chaps. Just to clarify, I have a wideband magmount for the car and it sits on an old Lb (pound) weight by the window at home which is less than 150m from the fence at Lossie :)

Paul - the way I work the bctool software is to lockout every frequency bar the Lossie/Kinloss frequencies and some ScotMil ones and only open what I need on the scanner on the day. This way it's easy to lockout or open groups.

I would consider making my own aerial for the roof but it would require to be more than 1m above the roofline to receive signals from all around. This would require planning permission and as I work in that particular department it would be very difficult for me to claim ignorance Shocked

I think I'm going to go with the W889 and start from scratch again.

Al

Location : North Lincolnshire Spotter Watch Member : No

Hi Al,

I'm surprised you're having trouble so close to the base. I have 2 of the 3500XLTs: for my wife and myself; one fitted with the 889, the other with the standard aerial and we've never noticed a difference at airfields for local signals. Yes, the Watson is better for more distant/weaker stuff, but the Uniden's aerial is still reasonable for UHF.

For home use, have you tried making the 1st DIY aerial on the sticky of this section? I did, it's very good.

Mike

Subject: Re: Watson W889 & 3500XLT 2009-03-30, 16:07

OK - I took the plunge and spent this months pocket money on the Watson W889. I was close to the airfield today (Duffus Castle) and what a difference with the Watson on Shocked

It was fairly busy and swapping the aerials showed a marked decrease in activity registered on the 3500XLT so I hoovered across to the end of 23 and met up with a couple of the chaps for a more scientific comparison. I was picking up everything they were and more (although this could be down to channels selected). The two other scanners were the Yupi 7100 and Icom R5 (Mk2) and although it was probably wishful thinking, it seemed the 3500 + Watson just had the edge. Swapping aerials back to the supplied one and I only picked up a fraction of the transmissions the other two picked up.

So I've probably got a duff aerial but no worries because the Watson is my aerial of choice until the next time I'm stood at the fence listening to another 3500XLT with a different aerial picking up all the stuff I'm missing.... Roll Eyes

Thanks for your help chaps ;)

Al

Location : Near RAF Aldergrove

Looking at this antenna and also the watson 901 which is just for the airbands. I wonder would there be much difference in performance between the two? I mostly listen to airbands but wouldn't mind the option of wideband listening too when out and about. Would the super gainer 889 be a better idea?

Location : North Lincolnshire Spotter Watch Member : No

Pleased you got a result Al. The best mobile set-up I've found by far is when using a magmount aerial, with the car's roof acting as a huge ground plane. This, along with outputting through the car's speakers (http://fightercontrol.forumotion.com/scanners-f9/scanner-thru-the-car-speakers-t4874.htm) produces brilliant results.

Mike

Location : worcestershire Spotter Watch Member : Yes !!!!

Hi Mike, Please would you explain if the ariel has to be electrically bonded to the car for it to act as a ground plain? Sorry if it's a dumb question but I don't know much about radio. Many thank's..Jim.. :) ...

Location : North Lincolnshire Spotter Watch Member : No

Hi Jim,

As long as the aerial is magnetically ''stuck'' to the car, preferably roof, that is sufficient. It doesn't need metal to metal contact. Radio hams will, in a pinch, use a similar method by sticking a magmount onto the middle of a biscuit tin.

I would have thought your DIY aerial (http://fightercontrol.forumotion.com/scanners-f9/ariel-for-out-and-about-t5741.htm) would be even better. Do you ever get approached by lustful plumbers? :) ;)

Mike

Location : worcestershire Spotter Watch Member : Yes !!!!

Thank's Mike, That's why I ask the question. The mag mount on my plumbers nightmare has a rubber boot on it to stop it marking the roof, and I was wondering if I needed to remove it. As it is just an incased version of the one in the stickey I owe it's performance to the designer of that. I've not been acurate at getting the radials the correct length because I was'nt sure which part of the frequ: spectrum to try to work it out from. I just made each radial 15" long and hoped for the best.
However, I'm quite pleased with the reception I get when it's on the car. From here in Worcestershire I get it ranging from Valley to Boscombe and Yeovilton and on occasions Waddington App. I play it through the car speakers and depending on my location (ie up high or down low, and the weather) by and large it's quite readable. So many thank's for your reply Mike, Take care..Kindest..Jim.. :) ...

Location : North Lincolnshire Spotter Watch Member : No

Hi Jim,

I commend you for modifying Alan's design into a portable device and thank you for sharing. Two suggestions I'd like to make:

1 - Try shortening the radials to 10''. This places the nominal reception point in the middle of the milair broadcast range. It'll also make the aerial less obvious. Plus, if you're driving with it attached, the wind effect will be less, therefore being quieter and putting less stress on the assembly.

2 - Also, why not spray the aerial satin or matt black to make it less apparent. I'm not aware of any regular non-metallic paints causing a problem with signals.

Mike

Location : worcestershire Spotter Watch Member : Yes !!!!

That p.m Mike was ment to be a post to your advice on this thread, but I clicked the wrong buttons Opps

..Don't get old, it causes all sorts of problems Laughing

Take care..Kindest..Jim.. :) ..