control channel

[henery64]

when i first uploaded my whistler and uniden scanner from rr site i could not receive anything from the niobrara tower in knox county. because i work for knox county s.o. i contacted the radio guys for the state patrol and learned that they changed freqs on the niobrara tower. i went to fcc site and added new freqs manualy from 2015 update and was then able to receive the state radio system (156.1275). my question is, when looking at fcc site, how do you know which freq is control and alternate channel. looking at rr site its easy as they highlight with red and blue. also just to save any pondering, the fcc site list a niobrara and winnetoon site which is weird because they are actually the same tower.

 

[troymail]

... when looking at fcc site, how do you know which freq is control and alternate channel. looking at rr site its easy as they highlight with red and blue..

FCC data won't provide that level of detail.... it will only come from monitoring the frequencies.

also just to save any pondering, the fcc site list a niobrara and winnetoon site which is weird because they are actually the same tower

FCC data isn't always 100% accurate for lots of reasons - but there could be other reasons for what you are seeing.

 

[henery64]

FCC data won't provide that level of detail.... it will only come from monitoring the frequencies.



FCC data isn't always 100% accurate for lots of reasons - but there could be other reasons for what you are seeing.

makes sense. thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[nd5y]

If you paid attention to FCC applications for new licenses and modifications to exisiting licnesnses in your state you would have seen the changes in Boyd and Knox Counties few years ago. If I remember right they moved one site and added another one.

FCC data is usually more accurate than RRDB. RRDB is nowhere near reliable in most areas and is only accurate for a wide area trunked system when there are people near each site who are smart enough to notice changes and submit the information.

 

[mule1075]

If you paid attention to FCC applications for new licenses and modifications to exisiting licnesnses in your state you would have seen the changes in Boyd and Knox Counties few years ago. If I remember right they moved one site and added another one.

FCC data is usually more accurate than RRDB. RRDB is nowhere near reliable in most areas and is only accurate for a wide area trunked system when there are people near each site who are smart enough to notice changes and submit the information.

1. Some people don't have time to go thru the FCC databases so they come here.

2. You have to remember the databases here are driven by user submitted information.

3. Your assertion that the databases here are only accurate on wide area trunked systems in my opinion is incorrect.

 

[nd5y]

1. Some people don't have time to go thru the FCC databases so they come here.

Then they get on the forums and ask "What frequency does _____ use?" or "Why can't I hear _____?".

2. You have to remember the databases here are driven by user submitted information.

3. Your assertion that the databases here are only accurate on wide area trunked systems in my opinion is incorrect.

Go back and carefully read what I wrote.

 

[mule1075]

Then they get on the forums and ask "What frequency does _____ use?" or "Why can't I hear _____?".


Go back and carefully read what I wrote.

1.That is what I thought these forums were for.

2. No need to reread it as are opinions as it seems differ. Back to the topic at hand.

 

[troymail]

Lots of people rely on the clarity that the RRDB provides - but maybe sometimes too much. Even more to the point - lots of people rely on what is in the library that their scanner vendor provides - which is based pretty much entirely on the data in the RRDB. Not everyone is an expert at digging to research, find, verify, and submit the information for others to use - which is fine.

Some of us enjoy the search, find, and report aspect of the hobby more than others - although it does irritate me sometimes when someone asks a question and another member readily posts what they know -- the irritating part is if they know, why don't they take a moment to submit that information so that others can use it?

 

[henery64]

first, dont want a word war. second, dont have a lot of time to read every little bit of info on rr to see how things are done. third, when ask a question to try and save time end up with someone that hates answering questions so now i dont want to ask questions and will prob never submit findings. its bad enough i have to deal with public in real life and now i have to deal with it on forums.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[mule1075]

first, dont want a word war. second, dont have a lot of time to read every little bit of info on rr to see how things are done. third, when ask a question to try and save time end up with someone that hates answering questions so now i dont want to ask questions and will prob never submit findings. its bad enough i have to deal with public in real life and now i have to deal with it on forums.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don't be discouraged.

 

[troymail]

Don't be discouraged.

Yes - there are some things that just need to be ignored (as in life everywhere).

 

[cellphone]

when i first uploaded my whistler and uniden scanner from rr site i could not receive anything from the niobrara tower in knox county. because i work for knox county s.o. i contacted the radio guys for the state patrol and learned that they changed freqs on the niobrara tower. i went to fcc site and added new freqs manualy from 2015 update and was then able to receive the state radio system (156.1275). my question is, when looking at fcc site, how do you know which freq is control and alternate channel. looking at rr site its easy as they highlight with red and blue. also just to save any pondering, the fcc site list a niobrara and winnetoon site which is weird because they are actually the same tower.

The original Niobrara site was submitted around 2010 and was associated with the call sign below. This transmitter was located just a few miles west of Niobrara. The FCC license is still active, but it seems this transmitter has been taken offline.

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=WQMR845
154.695
154.920
155.370a
155.6475c

From what I have gathered in the forum, the site has changed a couple of frequencies, and also relocated. It appears to be related to this FCC license with a transmitter south and a little east of Niobrara.

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=WQWF364
154.6950
155.3700
155.6025
156.1275c

This license was issued in August 2015, and the new site location could have been on for a couple of years. Radio Reference bases the database on CONFIRMED frequencies based on monitoring. We depend on users to submit data to the database (using the submit tab). There are likely not a lot of listeners in the area, thus we don't always have up to date information in these areas. Radio Reference provides many FCC reports and queries to help locate new frequencies and unidentified frequencies, but our DB pages are only based on confirmed and submitted info.

If the info above is correct, I will update the site location, frequencies, and callsign in the DB for the Niobrara site.

 

[nd5y]

There was another license issued in that area in 11/2017.
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=WRAF609

 

[UPMan]

And, to the OP's question, there is no way to tell from FCC license data whether any particular frequency will be used as a control channel. That information comes from user submissions and is only available in the RadioReference database.

 

[troymail]

And, to the OP's question, there is no way to tell from FCC license data whether any particular frequency will be used as a control channel. That information comes from user submissions and is only available in the RadioReference database.

Hmmm... thought I already said that....

:roll:

 

[UPMan]

Ah, yes you did. I should never try to read the forums on my phone...I always miss seeing stuff.

 

[henery64]

The original Niobrara site was submitted around 2010 and was associated with the call sign below. This transmitter was located just a few miles west of Niobrara. The FCC license is still active, but it seems this transmitter has been taken offline.

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=WQMR845
154.695
154.920
155.370a
155.6475c

From what I have gathered in the forum, the site has changed a couple of frequencies, and also relocated. It appears to be related to this FCC license with a transmitter south and a little east of Niobrara.

https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?fccCallsign=WQWF364
154.6950
155.3700
155.6025
156.1275c

This license was issued in August 2015, and the new site location could have been on for a couple of years. Radio Reference bases the database on CONFIRMED frequencies based on monitoring. We depend on users to submit data to the database (using the submit tab). There are likely not a lot of listeners in the area, thus we don't always have up to date information in these areas. Radio Reference provides many FCC reports and queries to help locate new frequencies and unidentified frequencies, but our DB pages are only based on confirmed and submitted info.

If the info above is correct, I will update the site location, frequencies, and callsign in the DB for the Niobrara site.

your last info is correct and thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk