Standard NOAA frequencies showing up as agency channels

Status
Not open for further replies.

OCO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
929
Location
Central Michigan
Running down I-75 in southern Tennessee last night, using a HP1 with GPS to scan. Close to the Georgia border, the scanner locked up on 162.550 - which is one of the standard NOAA weather radio frequencies. Because of their continuous broadcasting, these don't normally get put in a scan list, as the scanner will just lock up on that channel. I finally had to avoid the channel to get back to normal scanning. Later on when we were off the road for the night, I checked why it was showing up in the list and found that in the RR database listing for the Tennessee Fire Service and Codes Enforcement Academy (TFACA) 162.400, 162.475 and 162.550 are listed as "Channels 15, 16 and 14" . I'm scratching my head on this - does TFCA actually transmit on the NOAA channels, but more importantly, why put frequencies in the DB that because of their continuous transmission nature will lock a scanner up?:confused:
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,204
More than likely, those frequencies are in the programming for that agencies radios so they can monitor them.

They aren't supposed to be listed in the DB the way they are.
 

mikewazowski

Forums Manager/Global DB Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
11,755
Location
Central Ontario
I've found that in lots of other spots in the database as well.

Just because an Agency has the NWS channels programmed in, doesn't mean we need to list them in the database as being part of their channel lineup.
 

OCO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
929
Location
Central Michigan
Ahhh sorry... too late, too many miles yesterday - I should have posted in the Tennessee section. I debated on where to put the question, kind of thought it was a maybe a DB policy thing I was bringing up-that the TFACA entry might not be the only place this has occurred..

edit: It sure was a little bit of a pain moving at about 30 mph in some of the heaviest rain I've seen in a long time and trying to hit the "avoid" square up in the corner of the HP1... <grin>.
 
Last edited:

radiomanNJ1

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
789
Location
In the land of make believe
Quite the contrary they should be listed if the person posting knows exactly that those channels are in the radio and the postions they are in. It is more or less knowing exactly what is in the radio. They are programmed as no tx. normally. We know that those are weather channels but I like the actual lineup of the radio.
 

mikewazowski

Forums Manager/Global DB Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
11,755
Location
Central Ontario
I found the same thing travelling through Michigan and Ohio on I75 last year.

Scanner kept stopping on the NWS channels and I had to lock them out.

I should have reviewed my lockouts at the end of the trip so I could have the channels removed from the db.
 

mikewazowski

Forums Manager/Global DB Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
11,755
Location
Central Ontario
Quite the contrary they should be listed if the person posting knows exactly that those channels are in the radio and the postions they are in. It is more or less knowing exactly what is in the radio. They are programmed as no tx. normally. We know that those are weather channels but I like the actual lineup of the radio.
They are Nationwide channels and as such, they should not be duplicated in the area specific listings.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
11,564
Location
Taxachusetts
I think, if we have FIRST HAND knowledge of a Dept's channel plans, then put them in a Wiki, as we really don't need to have Weather Freq's and then a neighboring town listed along with this/that and the other thing, it would make the DB a mess.

ie: The Freq belongs to XYS PD, but YYZ and YYS have access, wioth Interop it should almost be assumed by the end user [scannists] to put in the neighboring towns and we should not be listing them in the DB.


Use the Wiki then. :wink:
especially when radios now have 256+ channels in xyz # of zones

Quite the contrary they should be listed if the person posting knows exactly that those channels are in the radio and the postions they are in. It is more or less knowing exactly what is in the radio. They are programmed as no tx. normally. We know that those are weather channels but I like the actual lineup of the radio.
 
Last edited:

OCO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
929
Location
Central Michigan
If I can chime in again (as a user), I'm not setting up subscriber units, so I don't need the total setup of one, just the channels that can be used in a scanner. This is probably more important to itinerants than to the locals that can identify and delete frequencies that will cause problems..I agree that info that is interesting but not usable should go in a wiki..

It was still great though having the rest of those channels accessible as we passed through the area (so thanks to the DB admin and whoever supplied the info to be put into the Tennessee DB). :)
 

kma371

QRT
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,204
Quite the contrary they should be listed if the person posting knows exactly that those channels are in the radio and the postions they are in. It is more or less knowing exactly what is in the radio. They are programmed as no tx. normally. We know that those are weather channels but I like the actual lineup of the radio.
The DB Admin guide specifically says we are not to have channel plans in the DB so as to prevent duplication.

Channel plans should be listed in the wiki as others suggested.
 

OCO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
929
Location
Central Michigan
I was curious how widespread the practice of posting NOAA radio frequencies in the database was (other than the Nationwide listing) so I did a query nationwide for each of them.
162.400 - GA,NH,NC,OH OR (x6), TX have them listed in systems
162.425 - OR (x6)
162.450 - None
162.475 - OH,OR (x4),TN,TX,VA
162.500 - FL (x2) ,Or (x4)
162.525 - Oregon (x2)
162.550 - FL, ID, IL,NV,NM,OH,OR (x6),TN,TX,WI
The entries in the listed states would program in a scanner as a conventional channel and scan (and lock up the scanner on that channel). I noted that there wasn't a consistency in the usage tag, although the most common was "other".
 

ericcarlson

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
1,532
Location
Houston, Texas
I addressed this issue with the admin team. Those frequencies should not appear outside of the nationwide listing. (They may appear in the wiki as part of a known channel plan.) Please feel free to submit requests for corrections where these may already exist in the database.
 

KE4ZNR

KE4ZNR@radioreference.com
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
7,106
Location
Raleigh, NC
I was curious how widespread the practice of posting NOAA radio frequencies in the database was (other than the Nationwide listing) so I did a query nationwide for each of them.
162.400 - GA,NH,NC,OH OR (x6), TX have them listed in systems
162.425 - OR (x6)
162.450 - None
162.475 - OH,OR (x4),TN,TX,VA
162.500 - FL (x2) ,Or (x4)
162.525 - Oregon (x2)
162.550 - FL, ID, IL,NV,NM,OH,OR (x6),TN,TX,WI
The entries in the listed states would program in a scanner as a conventional channel and scan (and lock up the scanner on that channel). I noted that there wasn't a consistency in the usage tag, although the most common was "other".
I thought I had them all out of the NC database but there was that one pesky last listing in Rockingham County. :mad:
I have removed it. There should not be any more WX freqs in the NC database (crosses fingers) . :)
Marshall KE4ZNR
 

reedeb

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
837
Location
Dallas Texas
The reason Emergency services have these freqs in their radios is to monitor them in the event of Hazardous Material, and smokey situations. ALSO gives them weather updates on hazardous weather [Severe storms, tornadoes and such]
 

rdale

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Feed Provider
Joined
Feb 3, 2001
Messages
11,380
Location
Lansing, MI
True although it's a bad method. In any case as this thread indicates several times they should not be in the RRDB.
 

OCO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
929
Location
Central Michigan
I addressed this issue with the admin team. Those frequencies should not appear outside of the nationwide listing. (They may appear in the wiki as part of a known channel plan.) Please feel free to submit requests for corrections where these may already exist in the database.
The admin team can't send a group message with the information as supplied? :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top