CAP Wiki suggestion

radioprescott · #1 (**permalink**) 11-03-2009, 11:51 AM

On the Civil Air Patrol Wiki page:

From the data already entered, it appears that the ODD channels (R-1, etc) are all the 1250/5500 freq pair and the EVEN channels (R-2, etc) are all the 1500/7000 freq pair. Also the CTCSS/NAC listing appears to be consistent for the freq pair, rather than the location.

So, can we identify the 'R-XX' identifier by the freq/tone assignment - a single entry per channel rather than multiple entries with the location? It would make the table a lot cleaner. Separate Wiki pages could be developed for location specific data. (The specific State/County pages could also be linked to these, which would make data maintenance and retrieval a lot easier as well.)

ecps92 · #2 (**permalink**) 11-03-2009, 05:26 PM

It's a good assumption, I thought the same thing [odd/even] but w/o input from other areas we are still assuming.

Why not make a WIKI CAP Page 2 for the R-xx thru R-xx for now.
Go for it and link it back.

I personally think the page has gotten too big [with the api of the RR DB info] for one page. And a little confussing for any newbies, as the RR DB info is [for many regions] outdated vs the current WIKI we began with.

Many of the Rptrs/Channels listed in the RRDB were from the Wideband days, but not many folks have contributed for the Narrowband info

Quote:

Originally Posted by radioprescott

On the Civil Air Patrol Wiki page:

From the data already entered, it appears that the ODD channels (R-1, etc) are all the 1250/5500 freq pair and the EVEN channels (R-2, etc) are all the 1500/7000 freq pair. Also the CTCSS/NAC listing appears to be consistent for the freq pair, rather than the location.

So, can we identify the 'R-XX' identifier by the freq/tone assignment - a single entry per channel rather than multiple entries with the location? It would make the table a lot cleaner. Separate Wiki pages could be developed for location specific data. (The specific State/County pages could also be linked to these, which would make data maintenance and retrieval a lot easier as well.)

flulympin · #3 (**permalink**) 11-04-2009, 03:28 AM

Good work !
Very cool, looking great so far. Keep going, I wanna see it finished!

ecps92 · #4 (**permalink**) 11-04-2009, 12:14 PM

One other comment, thought of overnight, is that we should be using CONFIRMED information, vs assumptions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by radioprescott

On the Civil Air Patrol Wiki page:

From the data already entered, it appears that the ODD channels (R-1, etc) are all the 1250/5500 freq pair and the EVEN channels (R-2, etc) are all the 1500/7000 freq pair. Also the CTCSS/NAC listing appears to be consistent for the freq pair, rather than the location.

So, can we identify the 'R-XX' identifier by the freq/tone assignment - a single entry per channel rather than multiple entries with the location? It would make the table a lot cleaner. Separate Wiki pages could be developed for location specific data. (The specific State/County pages could also be linked to these, which would make data maintenance and retrieval a lot easier as well.)

ka3jjz · #5 (**permalink**) 11-04-2009, 12:32 PM

Don't be afraid to make multiple pages out of this. I agree with ecps - splitting some of these topics (or perhaps all of them) onto separate pages allows them to grow without bumping into each other which is what is beginning to happen here.

As for assumed vs. confirmed stuff - there are a lot of ways you could indicate the difference. A different color on the row would, for example, make it stand out like a sore thumb. And remember, stuff that is confirmed should be sent to the DBA, and then use the extensions to pull the data. This creates a logical 'link' between the 2 areas.

Great job everyone! This is a good example of how the wiki can be used to foster research; remember even if something is wrong, someone else can come behind you to clean it up. Bravo.

73 Mike

radioprescott · #6 (**permalink**) 11-05-2009, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ecps92

Why not make a WIKI CAP Page 2 for the R-xx thru R-xx for now.
Go for it and link it back.

I did ... looks like it was renamed, and its a better name than I chose! Thanks Bill.

It does need a little formatting work. I'm not to good with tables

ecps92 · #7 (**permalink**) 11-05-2009, 11:08 AM

No problem, we will back you up !
Also added it to the TOC [Table of Contents] as it was hard to find and could be missed.

Formatting looks good, each of us does it a different way. I learned from cut-n-paste using files at ScanNewEngland, seems some folks at RR use that formatting and other use the style you choose. No biggie

I just wish the WIKI allowed SORT [tried and that is why the CAP pages were burping] in the Table Headers.

Looks like CA is ahead in finding the Primary [Non Rptr channels] !

Quote:

Originally Posted by radioprescott

I did ... looks like it was renamed, and its a better name than I chose! Thanks Bill.

It does need a little formatting work. I'm not to good with tables