Railroads update

[Mick]

Here are some active railroad channels heard from Colorado Springs that are not listed at
Railroads Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

160.215 csq input to 161.04 BNSF PBX, Pueblo
160.230 114.8 input to 161.550 107.2 KAD957 Manitou & Pikes Peak Railway Co.
160.245 csq BNSF PBX input is 161.535 csq
160.335 csq PBX “BNSF La Junta”
160.560 csq BNSF Pueblo
160.680 csq "Drake train"
160.890 csq UPRR?
161.010 csq "BNSF"
161.040 csq BNSF PBX Pueblo, input is 160.215
161.310 csq UPRR Pueblo
161.310 csq UPRR Denver
161.415 csq UPRR
161.475 csq BNSF
161.535 csq input to 160.245 csq BNSF

[PJH]

The issue I have is the listings of "uprr" etc only. Without location and use its pretty much useless. That was the issue with the old db.

[Mojaveflyer]

I appreciate your efforts! That's a lot of information and takes a lot of work to keep it up. I'll mention the updates on the Sunday Night Scanner Net we run every Sunday night at 8 pm along the Front Range on the 147.225 MHz CRA repeater.

[PJH]

Ok guys, another brain storm. I forgot of the format I generated in Wyoming with the BNSF. In the Wyoming Database (Wyoming Railroads Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference) I have both versions. BNSF (not the BN one) and the UP. I am inclined to to go to the BNSF format. After testing, those of you with the HP-1 scanners will not notice a change in the way the display works for the most part (still very readable).

Thoughts? I have time tomrrow to convert the format for both states.

[n0nhj]

161.550 has also been used by Amtrak conductors in Western Colorado. I've heard them there once in a great while while at the Station in Glenwood Springs.

Also for the Durango & Silverton 161.295 & 160.860, they use a DPL of 223 (yes rather unusual for a rail road for but since they don't connect to any other lines..).

Also Leadville, Colorado & Southern RR 161.295 is Ch 1 and uses a PL of 97.4.
160.380 is used with a PL that connects to the PA system on the train. The conductor switches channels and can make the announcements while walking the aisles.

[lazierfan]

I've uploaded to scanner the latest, keeping up with the updates, thanks all contributors.
Don't forget to uncheck "skip duplicate frequencies", and you'll get the proper tags on
a frequency that is used in different areas.

[PJH]

Updated

[PJH]

Ok guys, I've been doing some thinking and I think I'll be changing the format of the railroad database. What I really didn't realize until I redid the Nebraska one - was the ability to properly geolocate the listings - which I cannot do with the UP and BNSF listings as they are currently listed.

The shortlines/tourists ones I could since they are in the own catagories. It also might make things a little more readable and those with DB aware/location based scanners might love this a little more.

The format I would go with can be viewed here:
Nebraska Railroads Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

Thoughts?

[kma371]

I re-did all of California that way. I think it looks/works better.

[PJH]

I did Wyoming the same way. I did Colorado that way to make one nice compact list based on feedback I had before - though I think doing the NE/WY style in the end is a better way of showing the data and then able to add in location information.

What it means for me...is a few more hours creating a new listing Drag and drop would be awesome, but the DB backend just doesn't work that way!

[PJH]

I am going to start migrating the major RR's into their own subdivisions today, so don't fret if the DB looks messed up for a day or three. All the information will be there, but will be split until the main "BNSF" listing then say a BNSF Subdivision. Just a matter of migrating the information (backend DB stuff) and then adding location information for those who use DB and Location based scanners/software (so your not scanning southwest CO if you live in northeast CO).

Information the same, the format a little nicer. I'll also be adding in subdivision milepost boundries where I have the info to help out those who may not know the area(s).

[PJH]

Database has been updated... I did the best that I could with the range circles we have to use to enable location based scanning to work. I extended the circles to hopefully cover the end points with a little extra room. If you find that an area isn't covered, please send me a PM and I'll try to adjust it.

Some sub's are bigger than others that required a 100 mile or more range so you might hear or scan an area that isn't too close to your location. Until the DB software is finalized to allow "rectangles" which would work really good for railroads and square counties - thats the best we can do.