• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

MT Users, please check your county listings

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,478
I am finishing up a complete revamp of the entire state. Unfortunately I did not catch what a prior admin had done to the state, but it looks like he or someone submitted a bunch of unverified (aka FCC only data) in the database. Along with this, those using location based scanners have been at a disadvantage as just about all towns/cities were given countywide ranges instead of its specific range, as well as other inconsistencies.

I am seeing a bunch of "Sheriff -" listings as well. One county had 15 "Sheriff -" listings when the county only had 5 employed deputies, so I am thinking that's just not accurate in usage.

For listings that have generic descriptions (such as multiple Sheriff and Fire -'s), I am adding the last three numbers of the freq in (xxx). So if a listing is 155.475 with a generic description of "Fire" (and there is more than one generic fire listing) you will see Fire (475). This will help distinguish what channel is used for what and then the description can be updated to reflect actual usage.

Many listings are also lacking PL or NAC codes, which is most likely the result of the inaccurate information.

I am going one county at a time from A to Z over the next week, and I am in the F's right now.

So again, please check your local area and submit updates and corrections as you find them.
 

AlaskaRadar

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 3, 2005
Messages
42
Location
Victor Montana
I can confirm that for the listing in Ravalli county for Victor Fire department the Frequency is correct. I will refrain from listing the PL code to maintian proper use of the frequency as it is for Fire Department operations. You can PM me with questions. I will also double check the other listings for Ravalli county and can PM you corrections if approrpriate. Thank you for your work on this.

--Radar
 

PJH

Global Database Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
3,478
Output PL tones are fine. We do not list input PL tones.
 
Top