Submission rejected???

[n4yek]

I thought it was up to all of us to report and submit correct information or to make sure the information in the database is correct.
Well, that's what I have always done but in a recent submission, image attached, it was rejected with the explanation that it was pulled from the FAA database but it was not always accurate.
Here is the link to the listing I was trying to get corrected: Atlanta (ZTL) Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference
If you scroll down to the Newport listing, it says it is in the state of Virginia. That is NOT CORRECT!!!
It is located in the state of Tennessee.

If Radio Reference strives for accurate information, why would this be rejected? I am trying to have you list correct information.
I am curious for an explanation as to why you won't accept it.

 

[QDP2012]

...Atlanta (ZTL) Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference
If you scroll down to the Newport listing, it says it is in the state of Virginia. That is NOT CORRECT!!! It is located in the state of Tennessee....

You've probably researched this in detail and confirmed it beyond a doubt already, but looking at the map on that ARTCC page, the top corner of the region's black border looks like it is very close to Newport VA, north of Blacksburg VA.

Is there a possibility that the ARTCC listings for Newport VA refer to that location (which would match the "Low Usage" listed on the ARTCC page), while the ARTCC listing for Newport, without a state listed, are for Newport TN (which shows "Ultra-High" usage)?

I am probably wrong, but maybe this might explain why the FCC would give a "VA" designation to those and not the other Newport listings.

Of course the listing for Hickory, TN makes me wonder if it and the Newport, VA aren't just typo's.

Just a thought,

 

[DaveNF2G]

The submission as quoted is a little ambiguous.

I think what you meant to convey is that the "Newport" that is served by Atlanta ARTCC is in TN instead of VA. The rest of the verbiage tends to obscure the issue.

 

[n4yek]

The submission as quoted is a little ambiguous.

I think what you meant to convey is that the "Newport" that is served by Atlanta ARTCC is in TN instead of VA.

What part of this was confusing???

If you scroll down to the Newport listing, it says it is in the state of Virginia. That is NOT CORRECT!!!
It is located in the state of Tennessee.

 

[n4yek]

Is there a possibility that the ARTCC listings for Newport VA refer to that location (which would match the "Low Usage" listed on the ARTCC page), while the ARTCC listing for Newport, without a state listed, are for Newport TN (which shows "Ultra-High" usage)?

I can guarantee you I am not hearing Newport Virginia on a rubber duck inside my house from 220 miles away.

On both 269.500 MHz and 127.5500 MHz freqs you can hear the ATC talking, both freqs are simulcasting, but you will only the pilots reply on the VHF frequency. Those two freqs are listed for flights between 10'000 feet and 23'000 feet. (LOW)

Now with 236.500 MHz and 134.075 MHz, these freqs are linked together just like the other two listed but are for flights at 34'000 feet and higher. (Ultra-High)

If you continue to scroll down the page: Atlanta (ZTL) Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference near the bottom you will come across Tennessee RCAG sites. It shows you freqs listed for Carson Springs, which is a community in Newport Tennessee.

 

[KE5TLF]

The problem is you're asking them to correct something they have NO control over. It is just a straight up dump and display of gubment provided info. That is what the sections below the info imported from the NFDD are for, and as you just pointed out THAT info is at least mostly correct. Except for maybe the UHF Ultra High, which you can submit a correction for if need be.

As stated:

This information comes from the National Flight Data Digest (NFDD) dataset which is published every few months by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). We will import this data at various times during the year to provide this as an updated information source. Be advised that this data is not always accurate and up to date.

 

[n4yek]

The problem is you're asking them to correct something they have NO control over.

If that list is coming directly from the FAA via a link to their website in the exact format you are seeing, then no, they would not be able to do so.
But if they are using information they received from them and have input this info into the webpage themselves, possibly from cut and paste, then they can correct it.
I can understand that this could be something they wish to not do since it IS coming from the FAA that way every few months. They would have to keep re-doing the list every time it was downloaded.

 

[profiledescent]

Researched and verified, by personal observation, errors to anything like this (FAA RADAR or RCO/RCAG) seem to result in a pat answer. I went through this concerning their database of ARTCC RADAR sites. I drive past one on a regular basis that they refuse to acknowledge exist.

Generally I find this site is an awesome source of valid (and verifiable) data. I have to wonder if there is a particular individual who handles FAA faciliteis and info. The accuracy of FAA facilities and data is in need of improvement, and blaming the FAA derived data for ommision or inaccuracy is a feeble excuse at best.

There needs to be an avenue for "in the field" observations like your's to be reviewed, vetted, and included for database accuracy.

 

[ecps92]

Put the Corrected information into the Wiki with foot notes on each correction made.

Researched and verified, by personal observation, errors to anything like this (FAA RADAR or RCO/RCAG) seem to result in a pat answer. I went through this concerning their database of ARTCC RADAR sites. I drive past one on a regular basis that they refuse to acknowledge exist.

Generally I find this site is an awesome source of valid (and verifiable) data. I have to wonder if there is a particular individual who handles FAA faciliteis and info. The accuracy of FAA facilities and data is in need of improvement, and blaming the FAA derived data for ommision or inaccuracy is a feeble excuse at best.

There needs to be an avenue for "in the field" observations like your's to be reviewed, vetted, and included for database accuracy.

 

[mikewazowski]

If that list is coming directly from the FAA via a link to their website in the exact format you are seeing, then no, they would not be able to do so.
But if they are using information they received from them and have input this info into the webpage themselves, possibly from cut and paste, then they can correct it.

Read the rejection again. It is a straight data dump from the FAA. There is no cut and paste.

You need to advise the FAA of their mistake so it can be corrected at the source.

 

[SCPD]

The DB admins do a great job with making sure submissions are correct as this would cause havoc. It's important that it be correct, especially if you download the database to your radio. Don't know how they do it, but it would give me a migraine if I had to do it.

Thank you to the database folks!!

 

[profiledescent]

Read the rejection again. It is a straight data dump from the FAA. There is no cut and paste.

You need to advise the FAA of their mistake so it can be corrected at the source.

Good luck advising the FAA. They still put this stuff out full of errors/omissions. Why, I don't know. Having worked for them I can guess.

 

[W3DMV]

Thanks for the info Danny. I get rejected all the time with good info
and it gets old after while. Added your correction to my list. Appreciate
your effort...

 

[mikewazowski]

Thanks for the info Danny. I get rejected all the time with good info and it gets old after while.

I wanted to make sure we weren't rejecting good submissions so I checked your submission history and none of your 11 submissions were rejected.

Can you advise which submissions were rejected because as far as I can see, nothing of yours has ever been rejected:

Ticket #
Submission For
Date
Status
147337
Lebanon County
2014-03-23 21:25:58
Completed (scan-pa)
147093
Department of Juvenile Services
2014-03-15 17:43:27
Completed (dtscho)
147092
Frederick County
2014-03-15 17:40:05
Completed (dtscho)
146103
Adams County
2014-02-14 18:08:17
Completed (benrussellpa)
146004
York County
2014-02-11 09:30:42
Completed (n3obl)
145603
Adams County
2014-01-29 18:46:57
Completed (n3obl)
142363
Letterkenny Army Depot
2013-10-09 18:28:29
Completed (tknepp32)
140620
Railroads
2013-08-12 07:43:11
Completed (W2SJW)
133037
Adams County
2012-12-17 18:09:40
Completed (Audiodave1)
129585
Adams County
2012-08-28 18:21:39
Completed (Audiodave1)
128633
Adams County
2012-07-26 12:05:26
Completed (Audiodave1)

 

[wa8pyr]

Researched and verified, by personal observation, errors to anything like this (FAA RADAR or RCO/RCAG) seem to result in a pat answer. I went through this concerning their database of ARTCC RADAR sites. I drive past one on a regular basis that they refuse to acknowledge exist.

Generally I find this site is an awesome source of valid (and verifiable) data. I have to wonder if there is a particular individual who handles FAA faciliteis and info. The accuracy of FAA facilities and data is in need of improvement, and blaming the FAA derived data for ommision or inaccuracy is a feeble excuse at best.

Blaming the FAA derived data for inaccuracy is hardly a "feeble excuse." The information which the OP asked be corrected is in fact a direct automatic import from the FAA. We have no control over that data, and since it's the FAA data which is in error, blaming them is appropriate.

There is no particular individual "in charge" of data regarding FAA facilities and frequencies for RadioReference; all of our administrators work any submissions as they come in. We're dependent upon those user submissions to ensure that everything is correct; if something is not correct it's because no one has ever submitted the correct data.

There needs to be an avenue for "in the field" observations like your's to be reviewed, vetted, and included for database accuracy.

The up-to-date user-submitted information is listed below the erroneous FAA information, and is such an avenue; as the OP noted it's mostly correct, and if it isn't we'll be glad to make the updates if the correction is submitted.

 

[DaveNF2G]

What part of this was confusing???

The part where you mentioned that Newport, VA, is not within the Atlanta ARTCC, in context of the rest of the statements. It might have been clearer if you had just stated that the Newport served by Atlanta ARTCC is the one in Tennessee.

Obviously, I was not the only one who was confused.

 

[n4yek]

The part where you mentioned that Newport, VA, is not within the Atlanta ARTCC, in context of the rest of the statements. It might have been clearer if you had just stated that the Newport served by Atlanta ARTCC is the one in Tennessee.

Obviously, I was not the only one who was confused.

Isn't that what I said in the original post and then showed it to you again in post #4?
Pretty self explanitory.

Doesn't matter now, my question has been aswered. Thanks to all.