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 12-11-2013, 5:16 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 2
Default Oakland ARTCC

What happened to the frequency listing for the Oakland ARTCC. It disappeared and has not come back.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2013, 8:57 PM
Wiki Admin Emeritus
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bowie, Md.
Posts: 21,360
Default

Interesting - the page title is there but little else - here's the URL

Oakland (ZOA) Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

Mike
__________________
co-author, HF Digital Decoding
HF Forum moderator, RadioReference
Friends don't let friends buy Scancat Lite Plus!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2013, 9:49 PM
mciupa's Avatar
Forums Moderator
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,597
Default

Pick any ARTCC anywhere in the country and it is the same story. I just checked LA,Atlanta, Houston... they are all empty.

I've submitted a ticket for this bug to have this issue resolved.

Last edited by mciupa; 12-11-2013 at 10:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2013, 10:00 PM
kma371's Avatar
Global DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 5,983
Default

From what I remember I think those were pulled direct from some sort of FAA database. At least the wiki looking part of how they were listed. Maybe there is an update coming?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2013, 10:56 PM
Wiki Admin Emeritus
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bowie, Md.
Posts: 21,360
Default

Frankly I think it would be better if the FAA listings were dropped in their entirety and restore the DB entries. A link to the FAA listings would be appropriate, along with the warning about their accuracy.

If we're only supposed to have validated information in the database, it kinda flies against the process, as we all know those FAA listings are iffy in their accuracy....Mike
__________________
co-author, HF Digital Decoding
HF Forum moderator, RadioReference
Friends don't let friends buy Scancat Lite Plus!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2013, 8:52 AM
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
   
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ormond Beach FL
Posts: 119
Default

I have seen many people blast the FAA listings for the accuracy. I have been using the FAA listings from their 56 day database for years. Are they 100% accurate, NO. Are they very close, my scanner is receiving ARTCC comms on nearly all listed for the ZJX area. Have I found ARTCC frequencies still active that are not on the list, YES. Taking into account the number of frequencies the FAA lists verses the errors, what is the actual error percentage?

I have seen on this forum as well as others if someone lists a set of frequencies and just 1 frequency is in error they'll blast the entire list (or website) has being junk or outdated. I have seen this from experience. A website I use nearly everyday gets blasted all the time even though it contains frequencies that make my scanner sing with tons of comms just as that website said. I think when it comes to saying if a site is accurate or not, its not fair to blast an entire list because there might be a few errors. Its called Percent Error. I haven't seen any site 100% accurate, including RR. I haven't seen any site 100% in error. While I haven't been into scanning for a long time, I can see some people have axes to grind with some website. That hurts the entire scanning community.

I have used ARTCC frequncies that were submitted by other listeners. Again, while the scanner picks up a lot of comms on user submitted frequencies what I have found is that many people submitting ARTCC frequencies will submit an ATC frequencies thinking its an ARTCC, or they don't know the difference.

Which is better? User submitted ARTCC frequencies or FAA listed frequencies? To answer that question you need to look at the Percent Error. Sharpen your pencil, not your axe.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2013, 10:55 AM
profiledescent's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 317
Default

It's like anything else, you need to gather data from several sources, then cross check and verify.

Example, and I'm not slamming or axing ARRL. ARRL's repeater directory comes out annually. Everyone knows it's full of dead pairs and other errors or omissions. But hey, that's what the repeater councils are sending them to publish, so you have to crosscheck with local club websites, coordination websites, operator reports, reapeaterbook.com, and alike. Repeaterbook.com is an interesting source. They have gleaned data from every source they can find, then us end users log in and confirm whether a site/freq is up or down.

Same for air band. It's not like we were paying money to Jeppesen and getting bad charts. After all, it's a hobby.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2013, 11:48 AM
kma371's Avatar
Global DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 5,983
Default

FWIW, the data is still there on our admin side, its just not visible on the public side. I'll ask around and find out what's up.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 12-16-2013, 2:56 PM
mciupa's Avatar
Forums Moderator
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,597
Default

I just checked and you could download the reports for the ARTCC's, but only if you have a premium membership.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2013, 3:18 PM
kma371's Avatar
Global DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 5,983
Default

This has been fixed.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2013, 7:29 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 2
Default

Thanks to all for your attention to this!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 12-17-2013, 9:23 PM
kma371's Avatar
Global DB Admin
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 5,983
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vhbra241 View Post
Thanks to all for your attention to this!
No prob
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 5:55 AM.


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