Bug #323
closedAdding airband channels to VX6 doesn't work correctly
0%
Description
When adding channels for airband (108-136 AM) reception with chirp, the memory is not set correctly to allow reception. Symptoms noticed on the radio are:
First character of name or frequency always displays as 'P' (frequencies will look like P23.450)
Tone squelch is set to a nonsensical mode: 'SQ' indicator is on, but not 'T' (even though no tone mode was set in chirp) and squelch will never open
Cycling through tone modes on the radio when this memory channel is selected causes it to crash and reboot (no memory settings are damaged though)
I will gather more information soon and provide some memory dumps of channels programmed directly on the radio as well as new channels created by chirp for the same frequencies.
Files
Updated by Tom Hayward about 12 years ago
Post your .img and steps to reproduce.
Updated by Stephen Cavilia about 12 years ago
- File vx6-airband.img vx6-airband.img added
Actually, checking with 0.2.3 this seems to be fixed. There is a still a slight difference in the data generated: field unknown12 has a value of 0000b for channels added in the 136-174 band and 0101b for other things, but is always set to 0000b by chirp. doesn't seem to affect operation though. Examples where the radio sets it to 0101b are airband, FM broadcast, 70cm repeaters, GMRS, and an 800mhz public safety channel.
Channels 64 and 65 contain the same frequency information, as programmed by the radio and by chirp respectively. Channels starting at 400 were programmed by chirp 0.2.2. These display the squelch problems described.
Updated by Stephen Cavilia about 12 years ago
More testing: the channel 65 data was actually created somehow by using yesterday's daily build (which allowed writing some data but the radio did not show the channel as selectable), I think by accidentally copying from 64. 0.2.3 still produces the same effects as 0.2.2
Updated by Tom Hayward about 12 years ago
- Assignee set to Tom Hayward
Stephen Cavilia wrote:
Actually, checking with 0.2.3 this seems to be fixed.
If I understand you right, this is a duplicate of #232 and working correctly in 0.2.3 and recent daily builds, right?
Updated by Tom Hayward about 12 years ago
- Status changed from New to Rejected
No response from reporter. I think this is a dupe.