Hmmm, Accuracy?

[ka5lqj]

Hi,

Well, my computer is back up an going again, but that's another story......

Anyway, I'm somewhat of a stickler (read: anal-retentive) when it comes to frequency database entries. (Bigg Smile!) I've found that R$'s old "Police Call" and "CityFreq"s data is WAAAAY inacurate for the LA, AR, & TX areas. Now, I'd LOVE for RR to be the most accurate it can be. I LOVE RR and what it has done and is doing, so I want to help, just as Lindsay and the Managers do...a tireing and sometimes, it seems, a *thankless job*. But, there are those of us who DO appreciate ALL of your efforts.

I'm "volunteering" (when I can) to take the data from both of these sources and go through the F.C.C. Database to weed out, expired, cancelled, dropped apps, etc. for the counties in Louisiana and Texas. Maybe Arkansas, later. I'm medically and mentally disabled, but this helps me to keep my mind busy and hopefully sharper.

Now, how would you lke me to submit, this updated information...only "active" frequencies according to the F.C.C.?

Example: The Cy Fair VFD33.78 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD, in Houston & Spring, TX uses 33.44mcs, BUT, according to the F.C.C., they also use :

33.800 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.820 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.820 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.840 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.880 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.900 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
33.980 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
157.450 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD
154.280 F KD*46605 Cy Fair VFD

(Format is from my spreadsheet, modled after "Police Call". The "Other" callsigns they were assigned are now 'dead'.)

Several other VFD's in the Houston area are now under an "umbrella" agency. Their callsigns and frequencies have not changed, they are now under the "umbrella" agency's name. ;-)

At the present time, I'm not able to listen and verify these changes, due to the distance from Houston to Shreveport AND band conditions, LOL! Is this acceptable?

I am adding antennas at home, as high as I can physically get them to hear, as far as I can. I'll have both ground plane and directional yagi antennas to hear, hopefully, within at least a 125 mile radius of Shreveport, LA. This also will apply to "Business's" I can accurately verify through the F.C.C. database. Some, I already know are "radioactive", as I monitor their "traffic" on occassion. (You'd be suprised what you *hear* what some folks SAY on their radio units. They think no one is bothering to listen to them, LOL!) Some of the low-band (25-50mcs) stuff can be quite "interesting". A good 100 watt mobile can carry quite a distance on low-band.

Well, you can "E-maul" ("flame") me at: KA5(dot)LQJ@gmail(dot)com and let me know.

Respectfully submitted,
73 (Best Regard),

Donald J. "Buck" Saunders
Amateur Radio (Yes, Morse code) KA5-LQJ

Grid Sq; Em-32cl
10/10 International Nets
YahooGroups ARCOS-List Moderator
Charter Member: NBSRC -" No *Bravo Sierra* Radio Club "

 

[mciupa]

Hello Donald .
There is a submission guide in the WIKI that you can review and submit following those guidelines.

http://wiki.radioreference.com/index.php/RR_Database_Submission_Guidelines

 

[loumaag]

Don,

While we appreciate the effort, the basis of the RR DB is "what is", not what the FCC says it should be. The DB here is based solely on user submissions and we request that users only submit what they can personally verify (in other words monitor). We use all those other sources (FCC, various lists, etc.) to help identify those things that we can hear. As I mentioned to you in the past, there are several things that most scanner hobbyist normally just skip over but that we welcome in the DB (business stuff for example). Some of those are the toughest to ID because of low traffic volume and multiple entities on the same frequency.

In addition, we (the staff) are pretty much in agreement that taking something out of the DB because it is no longer used must be more than just some good guess or indeed even third hand information. A great example is LA State Police 39.50. Ask any trooper, and the likely response will be "Huh?". Yet we know that the frequency is still active, just used for a different purpose than it used to be.

So, based on this, we think that the RR DB is the most accurate source available. :wink:

 

[Jay911]

I don't know if the FCC behaves like this, but here in Canada, just because someone is licensed for a frequency doesn't mean it's "their" frequency, and IMO shouldn't be posted.

For example, fire department A has 169.740 as their primary dispatch frequency. Fire department B has 413.3875 as their primary dispatch frequency. Fire department B is also licensed for 169.740 - but that's because they are geographically very close to fire department A and often do calls together. I don't agree that 169.740 should be listed in the database section for fire department B at all, because that doesn't represent the true usage of that frequency.

 

[loumaag]

I don't know if the FCC behaves like this, but here in Canada, just because someone is licensed for a frequency doesn't mean it's "their" frequency, and IMO shouldn't be posted.

For example, fire department A has 169.740 as their primary dispatch frequency. Fire department B has 413.3875 as their primary dispatch frequency. Fire department B is also licensed for 169.740 - but that's because they are geographically very close to fire department A and often do calls together. I don't agree that 169.740 should be listed in the database section for fire department B at all, because that doesn't represent the true usage of that frequency.

It certainly depends on the situation. Let's use your example. If FD A and FD B often run together and use each others frequencies (depending on where the run is) then yes, it should be in the DB and described as inter-op with FD x. If it is an occasional use or only there as a backup plan, then no it shouldn't be. The point of the DB is not to say everything that some agency is authorized to use, but where it might prove useful for the scanner user in that area. An example of something (IMHO) that should not be in every law enforcement's line-up is 155.4750, because every LE agency in the US is authorized to use it; all it would do is take up space on the page.

 

[ka5lqj]

DB "accuracy"....

Hi Lou, All,

Anything I submit would be 'verified' by reception. I'm certainly NOT going to be
able to verify some frequencies, simply because of distance from my QTH. I
seriously doubt that the 800mhz 'trunked' frequencies in Houston, Dallas, etc.
will be loggable, UNLESS I had a very tall tower, high gain, directional antenna
array and pure *luck*, but then maybe with a good band opening later in Cycle
24 of the Sunspot count. I have logged UHF TV stations as far away as Florida,
some years ago and only for about 2 hours on a very sunny day, off a UHF loop
on the back of the set, LOL! At times, there were several Tv stations on channel
from different locations. Needless to say, I was dumbfounded.

My home antenna, a 2 meter/70cm, "J-pole" is up at 40 feet. It's a good omni-
directonal, but I have plans for yagi's to build this Winter and mount on another
tall structure and rotatable.

I've downloaded "Open Office" and it has a scaleable database that I can use to
input ALL 'possible' enities for certain bands, their callsigns, etc. I'm setting up
a place for a *checkmark* to show I've verified it, date and time (UTC), as I
said before, any submissions I make will be verified and I'll have somewhat
"proof" of reception. If and when I hear the others, I'll submit them as well.

Well, I need another cup of coffee and to let the dog out.

Blessings all,
Respectfully submitted,
73,

Don/KA5-LQJ