Batboard

Hi,
Recently, I added some simplex channels to my Astro Saber III's and Spectra. I noticed that in simplex the F7E NAC setting will not "un-squelch" the radio when I am using it for simplex. The F7E command works fine with repeaters on all the radios. Does anyone know of a fix for this, or why this is happening??

Thanks!

I can't honestly say I've ever tried it on a repeater, but I can confirm that it doesn't work on direct. I'm assuming it's a bug in the firmware that Motorola's never really cared enough to fix (especially this late in the game). I would either set the conventional personality to Digital CSQ, or program a button or switch to defeat PL (or NAC, in this case).

akardam wrote:I can't honestly say I've ever tried it on a repeater, but I can confirm that it doesn't work on direct. I'm assuming it's a bug in the firmware that Motorola's never really cared enough to fix (especially this late in the game). I would either set the conventional personality to Digital CSQ, or program a button or switch to defeat PL (or NAC, in this case).

I havn't found a NAC defeat.. does that even exist??

K5HDM

It's the same button. It may only be called PL defeat, but it will defeat any tone or NAC reciever condition on a channel and open the squelch soley on carrier strength, whether it be analog or digital.

Aka the MON (monitor) button

k5hdm wrote:Hi,
Recently, I added some simplex channels to my Astro Saber III's and Spectra. I noticed that in simplex the F7E NAC setting will not "un-squelch" the radio when I am using it for simplex. The F7E command works fine with repeaters on all the radios. Does anyone know of a fix for this, or why this is happening??

Thanks!

It does NOT work in my AS and XTS3000.

I don't know about latest firmwares, but it's true for mine.

Check the Conventional Configuration setting in your CPS. If it's set to "Silent Monitor"
you won't hear anything when you push the monitor button if the channel is inactive.

There was a thread awhile ago in the astro fourm about this. I cannot presicely recall but it was either you needed to have fairly current fw and cps or you where out of luck. I want to say the f7e worked for rptr, but its been awhile since I have used either radio. I won't be back home until tomorrow night to try it.

I sat down this evening and looked at an Astro Spectra codeplug. It looks like, no matter what you do, the "Direct" NAC always mirrors the transmit NAC. So, I suppose that would make sense why it works on repeat and not direct, even if you set up a simplex channel. *shrug*

Regardless, as I posted above, either set that personality to Digital CSQ, or program a MON button (on a mobile) or a PL Defeat button or switch (on a portable) if you only want to defeat the NAC sometimes.

akardam wrote:It looks like, no matter what you do, the "Direct" NAC always mirrors the transmit NAC.

And that is the reason why this radio, among others is not compliant with the current TIA P-25 standard.

radioinstl wrote:

akardam wrote:It looks like, no matter what you do, the "Direct" NAC always mirrors the transmit NAC.

And that is the reason why this radio, among others is not compliant with the current TIA P-25 standard.

Considering that the radios in question are more or less at the end of their life cycle, I doubt Motorola will bother to fix the bug while an easy work around exists.

Think we've pretty well beat this one to death, guys.

Considering that the radios in question are more or less at the end of their life cycle, I doubt Motorola will bother to fix the bug while an easy work around exists.

Think we've pretty well beat this one to death, guys.[/quote]


The Texas DPS has HUNDREDS of these radios in use, and they recently found out that they could use them on their new P25 system so they recycled them and plan to use them for a good while.. They did buy alot of EF Johnson 5100's but cancelled an order because they re-issued hundreds of astro saber iii's that they had acquired to be compatable with border patrol in that area of TX a while back.. I also understand that San Francisco still has alot of those out.. I am sure they still use them in other areas, too. So, is it REALLY at the end of it's life cycle?

Here is how bnet.com defines "product life cycle:"

* the period which begins with the initial product specification and ends with the withdrawal from the market of both the product and its support. It is characterized by defined stages, including research, development, introduction, maturity, decline, and abandonment.
* the life span of a product from development, through testing, promotion, growth, and maturity, to decline and perhaps regeneration. A new product is first developed and then introduced to the market. Once the introduction is successful, a growth period follows with wider awareness of the product and increasing sales. The product enters maturity when sales stop growing and demand stabilizes. Eventually, sales may decline until the product is finally withdrawn from the market or redeveloped.

So, if you go by this definition it's the manufacturer who controls when the life cycle ends, not the user or agency. Which is not to say that because the theoretical end of life cycle arrives that the thing, whatever it is, doesn't stay in use. I understand that in London they refuse to approve annual taxi inspections when the car reaches 600,000 miles because they're afraid of--get this--metal fatigue!

What you may not know is that Moto a (year +?) Ago annouced that parts for the astro saber where dwindling rapiy. When they are gone, that's it. DPS is acting wisely in keeping good equpment in service while they can as long as they contiune to purchase enough replacemtn untis as the as3's fail beyond repair

We use the astro saber on a new P25 9600 system and they perform just as well as any of the 2.5 or 5k units out there.

But, my worst fear will be realized if they decide to drop a 700 channel in the mix.

Yes, they work just fine.. The sabers they and I have (I got mine from surplus before they decided to keep them.. for 50 bucks each.. even got one still in the plastic!!!!) The DPS went to the 2.5 spacing and they thought sabers were not capable of that, but I figured out they would take the input freq of 154.6875 just fine and recieve the repeater (on 155.4675) on 155.470 just perfectly.. I mentioned that to a fellow ham who works at their radio shop.. He mentioned they were re-issuing them to me 2 days later.. I had seen all of the accessories and stuff when they sent them to surplus and it looked like a motorola warehouse (I got speaker mics for $5 brand new.. they had 3 CASES of them.. probably 100 in each case).. they got all that back, so I doubt they'll run out of accessories anytime soon.. I'm not sure why it'd take a .6875 input but wouldn't do it on the output.. and a freq counter verifies it's right on frequency..

mancow wrote:We use the astro saber on a new P25 9600 system and they perform just as well as any of the 2.5 or 5k units out there.

But, my worst fear will be realized if they decide to drop a 700 channel in the mix.

The system will handle it... you can configure certain TGs to not use 700. I also understand you can set the system to not use a 700 channel if any radios affiliated with the TG in question are 800-only.

Oh right on, I had no idea that was even a possibility. Thanks for the info.

k5hdm wrote:The DPS went to the 2.5 spacing and they thought sabers were not capable of that, but I figured out they would take the input freq of 154.6875 just fine and recieve the repeater (on 155.4675) on 155.470 just perfectly.. I mentioned that to a fellow ham who works at their radio shop.. He mentioned they were re-issuing them to me 2 days later.. I'm not sure why it'd take a .6875 input but wouldn't do it on the output.. and a freq counter verifies it's right on frequency..

Did you actually try writing 155.4675 to the radio, and if so what (if any) error code did it throw back at you?

I ask because every VHF Astro Saber I've tried would take 7.5 kHz-spaced frequencies no problem. I had a model 1 set up listening to DPS Houston on the A2 pair and 11B back in 2006 when they first jumped to P25.

When you tried to put the 155.4675 it gave me the "Not capable of 2.5khz spacing, upgrade firmware" error.. but when I put the 154.6875 into the input, it worked great.. no error and right on freq when transmitting..

Interesting. I don't remember what the HOST f/w was in my old model 1, but I want to say it was in the R07.xx range. In any event, I've got one with old R05.xx HOST firmware next to me on the desk that I'll try it on tomorrow.

edit: 154.6875 works because it's a 12.5 kHz-spaced frequency.