NWin System Downloading

[W0RS]

I am utilizing the EZScan software but when I update the library and then send this to the psr800 scanner the newest NSP sites are not there such as the omaha troop A data. I have checked radio reference and it's in there database. Am I missing something here?

Would there be a reason that the ezscan software has not retrived the data? It was my understanding ezscan pulls the data from radio reference...

Any help would be appreciated

 

[realgeo]

Howdy!

That's a very interesting observation because my Pro96Com does the same thing.

After doing a download in Pro96Com - I selected the 6699 NWIN entry - I opened the System.ini file and found all of the names, but with 200-series sites numbers - not the 100-series numbers in the RR database. It's almost as if the 100-series site numbers are getting 100 added to them.

Joe/Admins - do you have any insight into this? AFAIK, this is not happening to ORION site numbers now that I look at them.

73

 

[SCPD]

I have the PSR-800 and they update their EZScan library on Saturdays. You'll have to type it in manually like I did or wait until Saturday.

 

[cellphone]

Howdy!

That's a very interesting observation because my Pro96Com does the same thing.

After doing a download in Pro96Com - I selected the 6699 NWIN entry - I opened the System.ini file and found all of the names, but with 200-series sites numbers - not the 100-series numbers in the RR database. It's almost as if the 100-series site numbers are getting 100 added to them.

Joe/Admins - do you have any insight into this? AFAIK, this is not happening to ORION site numbers now that I look at them.

73

I was thinking the same thing looking at the sites a couple days ago, but I did not pull the trigger on the change. Pro96Com shows DEC site numbers different than RR. Until now, the site numbers were entered in RR based on Pro96Com DEC site number and not considering the RFSS of 1. They are all incorrect in the DB and the Dec site number is 100 higher than the actual site number because the system uses RFFS of 1. When I make the change, you will see that the Pro96Com HEX site numbers (Txxx) will match, but the DEC numbers will look a little odd in RR because of an extra leading zero in the site number. I will make the changes and this should solve the issue with importing into trunking software.

 

[realgeo]

I was thinking the same thing looking at the sites a couple days ago, but I did not pull the trigger on the change. Pro96Com shows DEC site numbers different than RR. Until now, the site numbers were entered in RR based on Pro96Com DEC site number and not considering the RFSS of 1. They are all incorrect in the DB and the Dec site number is 100 higher than the actual site number because the system uses RFFS of 1. When I make the change, you will see that the Pro96Com HEX site numbers (Txxx) will match, but the DEC numbers will look a little odd in RR because of an extra leading zero in the site number. I will make the changes and this should solve the issue with importing into trunking software.

Hey, Joe!

Very good - I'm glad you found that! Like I said, the ORION site numbers are all correct when you do a download from Pro96Com, which is odd!

I appreciate your efforts to take care of this issue!

Patiently awaiting the arrival of Site 177 (supposedly, Nebraska City)

73

 

[W0RS]

Great! Looks like a fix is in progress. I look forward to loading the data into my PSR-800...

Thanks