Problem with download using ARC-XT Pro

[boothhartley]

The data for the Los Angeles ISIS system that appears on web page
Interagency Communications Interoperability (ICIS) Trunking System, Various, California - Scanner Frequencies
works well in my BCD396XT scanner. But when I use the ARC-XT PRO software to
download the data electronically, I get erroneous and missing data for the
site bandplans. Specifically, for the Glendale site, ARC_XT received
lower upper step offset
470.0125 474.75 12.5 380

when it should be
lower upper step offset
470.0125 471.5 12.5 380
482.0 485.2375 12.5 380

There is a similar problem with the Pomona Site.
There are also incorrect base frequencies for Oat Mountain, Montebello, Beverly
Hills, and Culver City.
The Burbank and Hauser Peak site data looks OK.

I submitted a bug report and got a reply from bheisner which said:
"You need to get an updated version of the software. The site was updated about a month ago to used SOAP vs HTML."

Today (9/29/2009) I updated ARC-XT pro to version 1.2, build 1, Full Version, and I tried a fresh download of the Los Angeles ISIS system with the same erroneous results. It looks to me like there are separate databases for the viewable web pages and the downloadable data.

[loumaag]

An interesting problem. Let's clear up a couple of things before we discuss possible solutions.

1. This is not a scanner programming software problem and indeed this is the proper place for this thread.
2. The database does not have those other band plans, it only contains the one you are downloading; i.e., 470.0125 MHz, 12.5 kHz, 380 offset. This is why that is the only one you get on download.
3. The one you put as the second band plan setting is supposed to be offset 500. You can have overlapping plans, but I don't think that is the case in this instance.
4. The database can indeed store multiple band plans; however, it cannot store different ones for different sites. That is really the crux of the problem here.
5. The appropriate band plans are indeed listed as a text file note on the DB page, but that does mean they need to be set manually by the individual based on the type of radio they have.

Now, what factors are involved in possible solutions?

• The first thing to consider is that this type of situation is the exception to the rule, not at all common.
• The next is that the database, as mentioned above, can have multiple entries for a band plan, it cannot do it by site and since only a few sites have the same band plan, if I would have been the person setting this system up in the DB, I would have elected to not enter any band plan at all necessitating users to program each site's band plan manually based on the description included on the page.
• In regard to the previous point, remember, most scanners out there right now do not program a system by site; although, I will admit that the gap will eventually close and those scanners that can program sites individually on a system will eventually will overtake the older ones. Yes, I recognize that the older scanners (I mean anything BCD396T and older of all brands) can program several systems/banks individually, but let's face it, that is not the way most folks use them.

The possible solutions are:

1. Recognize the problem and program sites in the scanner by hand (or in the software after download) for this system or any other rare exception that may exist.
2. Change the structure of the database, SOAP interface, and all associated scanner programming software already written so that there exists an option to program a single band plan (even if it is multiple entry) for Motorola systems or attach a separate band plan to each site in such systems as this one.

I suspect that the first alternative is the one that will have to be used, certainly in the short term, if not forever.

[blantonl]

We have a feature enhancement request in place to assign bandplans to sites... that is the issue in this case. We're working on implementing this as soon as we can.

[boothhartley]

Thank you for your informative response. I can imagine how difficult it is to keep up with the rapidly changing capabilities of scanners. I feel like a newby with this scanner, even though I have been scanning since 1964 when I build my own tunable receiver from scratch - the whole paradigm has changed. I was very frustrated for the first few days, and almost returned it in disgust. I finally isolated the problems to two: the one mentioned above, and another problem where ARC-XT Pro was having errors sending the channel spacing to the scanner. Once I got the channel spacing set properly, and the band plan manually entered, everything works great and I am delighted.

BTW, I reported the channel spacing error to Butel, and three days later I was notified that there was a software update; imagine my delight when I found that the bug had been fixed (I am a computer programmer, and I know how hard it is to be that attentive to user difficulties).

Also, I apologize for mistyping the second part of my band plan - the offset is indeed 500, as you rightly surmised.

Thanks for your help,
Booth Hartley
N6BH