Some kind of InActive UCAN List

[enosjones]

We need to make a Formal or informal type of Inactive UCAN list Cuz its sounds like we have quite a list and no "references" to refer to on a single page. is there a way to either make a list or an informal post to the Database then as it becomes active then add the site id and stuff? Little Mountain near Vernal and Abajo in San Juan County are pending with no licenses issued yet, as far as Windy Ridge Frisco Cedar in Millard County and many others that are inactive but approved like Bruin Point and Bald Mesa we need a list on a main page or in the database to refer to... Any Thoughts?


Also has anyone noticed that the forums today seems to be down alot?

 

[bchris]

All Sites for UCAN 643E

We need to make a Formal or informal type of Inactive UCAN list Cuz its sounds like we have quite a list and no "references" to refer to on a single page. is there a way to either make a list or an informal post to the Database then as it becomes active then add the site id and stuff? Little Mountain near Vernal and Abajo in San Juan County are pending with no licenses issued yet, as far as Windy Ridge Frisco Cedar in Millard County and many others that are inactive but approved like Bruin Point and Bald Mesa we need a list on a main page or in the database to refer to... Any Thoughts?

Enos,

I know this list is not complete, but is this what you had in mind? I could include all the pending (not yet active) sites, the locations, and all the freqs from the FCC licenses. I did not want to do all that work unless this format is what everyone wants.

-bc
.

 

[enosjones]

Locations are nice i dont know where big mountain is but Little Mountain near Vernal needs to be on there, Uintah County Utah.
Abajo is in San Juan County but covers a large area as well
Bruin is in Carbon County But wll also Cover the Uintah Basin Vernal Dushesne and Roosevelt area
Bald Mesa Is in Grand County but will also Cover San Juan County and Green River in Emery County
That what I know From Around Here, the others we would have to Look at where they are on the liscense..


I was also thinking of doing the same thing for Conventional Frequencies. But this critria for these ideas i have may not work for the Database or RR. Tim May not be able to add these in the Database unless they are definate and accurate, meaning they would have to be active and the agency confirmed.

I have alot of frequencies that are active but i have no clue who or what they are. Including these would be nice so others could inspect the or give their input, Me Personally i want to make sure when i add it to the database its 100% correct, and until it is i dont submit it.I personally have to either see them using the radios or they have to say there name on air or i have to get a callsign or id to compare to. then i submit it.

There are some as well that aint used very much but still are used, im not sure if its because they talk while passing though the area or if they are out of range, or just dont use the radios much.

I donno just some Ideas. That list you got would work then as they became active or confirmed Sites then we could update it. We have the Frequencies site name and most of the callsigns. So i think it will work....

 

[theaton]

New UCAN sites

I'm happy to post new UCAN sites once a control channel is heard. Little Mtn (Vernal) is listed now. I added a note that sites marked "new" might still be in flux.

A Wiki Page could used for proposed but inactive UCAN sites. There would be no point in making a list of "licensed but unused" conventional frequencies because the vast majority never get used.

 

[ryanisflyboy]

The utahradio.org wiki is a good place for collaboration for long-term projects like this. Another excellent place is Google Docs. That might be a much better place because it would allow you to have a collaborative spreadsheet. Both have pros and cons, but both are free.

Wiki Pros: Keeps revision history, allows many people to participate, shows up in google searches, etc.
Wiki Cons: Hard to organize tabular data beyond a few columns, no data validation, a bit harder to learn to use.

GDocs Pros: Very tight control over who has access, perfect for storing complex tabular data.
GDocs Cons: No good revision history (you can save multiple versions though)