RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Site Administration Forums > Database Discussion Forum


Database Discussion Forum - This forum is for questions about the database such as how to use it, layout or usability issues or suggestions for improvement. It is not for pointing out wrong information or getting help with programming.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-12-2018, 10:41 PM
Wiki Admin Emeritus
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bowie, Md.
Posts: 21,174
Default This looks like a mess

There appears to be 2 db entries which, on the surface, should be just one.

Here's the first

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=9923

and the second

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=8263

This is suspicious. The sysid, system type and system voice are identical. Yet one is listed as 'FleetNet / Silke Communications' while the other is 'Silke Communications'.

We now have 2 nearly identical and almost duplicate articles in the wiki for these 2.

The question is: which is right?

Mike
__________________
co-author, HF Digital Decoding
HF Forum moderator, RadioReference
Friends don't let friends buy Scancat Lite Plus!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2018, 2:06 PM
mciupa's Avatar
Forums Moderator
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,544
Default

The original from 2016 (California sites) would likely be the one to keep. Oregon can be migrated into the Cali system.

A Global DB Admin could tidy this up into one package.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2018, 5:19 PM
kma371's Avatar
Global DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 5,975
Default

The issue with that is several site numbers in Oregon would duplicate those in California. I wouldn't be for migration due to that issue.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2018, 6:13 PM
kd7kdc's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 645
Default

I would agree with KMA371 at the moment and motion to hold off for a while until we figure out how this system as shown on the Silke Fleetnet communications page is put together and how roaming is done.
Silke's page shows a system encompassing Canada to Mexico coverage as well as states further east.

Steve
WA,ID,OR DB Admin
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2018, 8:45 PM
kd7kdc's Avatar
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 645
Default

Doing some more digging there is another duplicate of NXDN system 2029.
There are 2 systems that it encompasses and from the company website it is roamable.
1. Western Washington by Wiztronics Wide Area Digital Dispatch Radio Service
2. Western Canada by WTS British Columbia Digital Push to Talk Wide Area Radio Network | Southwestern BC's Wide Area Push to Talk Network | WTS Wireless Technical Services Inc.
Silke Fleetnet Map FleetNet Radio Coverage Map, Wireless Communications by Silke
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2018, 7:20 AM
DaveNF2G's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Rensselaer, NY
Posts: 8,879
Default

I suggest looking at the OneVoice system in the northeastern US as a template for multiple operators of a multi-state network. Obviously duplicate site numbering would add some challenges.
__________________
David T. Stark
NF2G WQMY980 KYR7128
ARRL VE & Registered Licensing Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-16-2018, 10:19 AM
wa8pyr's Avatar
Technischer Guru
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,993
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kma371 View Post
The issue with that is several site numbers in Oregon would duplicate those in California. I wouldn't be for migration due to that issue.
Another question to ask is, are these truly a single system, or are they two separate systems sharing a system ID to permit "pseudo-roaming?"

The duplicate site numbers and lack of zone information if there is such a thing on Nexedge (separate zones would permit reuse of site numbers) make me think the latter.

The best option right now is to name one "Silke Communications (CA)" and the other "Silke Communications (OR/WA)" pending verification as to whether they're truly connected or not.
__________________
Tom Swisher, WA8PYR
Lead Database Administrator
PSR500/Pro197/Pro2035+OS535/BCD436HP/TRX-1

If I PM you about a submission, please reply promptly or your submission may be rejected.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 05-25-2018, 10:37 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 15
Default

They are two separate systems; the Washington & Oregon system, and the California systems. From what I have heard they are close to the maximum number of sites in each system.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions