troymail
Silent Key
After several trips to North Carolina and scratching my head trying to determine why when in the most southern parts of NC I see the 436 trying to scan the Virginia STARS system, I finally took a look at the specifics. I now see that, due to the limits of using circles (point and range) for the system (and other) coverages, the RRDB suggests that some sites and "departments" of the VA STARS system should be scanned over the entirety of North Carolina and as far south as almost Columbia South Carolina (see map)... absurd.
In contrast, for some other systems and departments, the circles are set as small as 1/2 mile - which from a scanning perspective doesn't make alot of sense either. If I am in the site footprint of a system and activity from a small town is being carried on that site, I usually want to hear that activity - not have the radio assume that is the case only if I am not driving directly through it. And before you say it - no, I don't want to set the range value higher in my radio.... I already have it thinking I should be scanning Virginia STARS in South Carolina... and all of this just slows the scan rate down.
I suspect I am not the only one who thinks there needs to be some changes --
First, the areas of coverage tracked and exposed through the RRDB need more than just "points and circles". Looking at the Sentinel software, it would appear that you can "manually" define a series of boxes to provide better/tighter coverage maps. As far as I know, RR doesn't support it so anything you do "manually" will continue to be manual and subject to loss and/or have to be reproduced each and every time you create a new favorites list from the library data.
Additionally - to make the location data more useful in the scanners, there also seems to be a need to provide a separate "department" range setting from the "system/site" range setting in the radios. Right now, a single lat/lon and range is used to manage both.
Just putting it out there for thought...
In contrast, for some other systems and departments, the circles are set as small as 1/2 mile - which from a scanning perspective doesn't make alot of sense either. If I am in the site footprint of a system and activity from a small town is being carried on that site, I usually want to hear that activity - not have the radio assume that is the case only if I am not driving directly through it. And before you say it - no, I don't want to set the range value higher in my radio.... I already have it thinking I should be scanning Virginia STARS in South Carolina... and all of this just slows the scan rate down.
I suspect I am not the only one who thinks there needs to be some changes --
First, the areas of coverage tracked and exposed through the RRDB need more than just "points and circles". Looking at the Sentinel software, it would appear that you can "manually" define a series of boxes to provide better/tighter coverage maps. As far as I know, RR doesn't support it so anything you do "manually" will continue to be manual and subject to loss and/or have to be reproduced each and every time you create a new favorites list from the library data.
Additionally - to make the location data more useful in the scanners, there also seems to be a need to provide a separate "department" range setting from the "system/site" range setting in the radios. Right now, a single lat/lon and range is used to manage both.
Just putting it out there for thought...