Re: [IRCA] Opinions requested on documenting station swaps

[Mike Hawkins <michael.d.hawkins@xxxxxxxxx>]

Scott,

I used your reply as a reference here because it addresses two things.
First is that FCC's website has so little information on it that is
accessible outside the FCC that its rather useless.  Tracking applications
always results in "major change", "minor change", STA or license.  I have
not been able to view an authorization for many moons.  There is little if
any correspondence, and legal action is rare.  Even asking FCC people about
how to find info, the response has been that the site isn't designed to give
much to people outside.  If you can point me to a way to get meaningful info
from their website, I'm all ears.  Its obvious that their website frustrates
me.

Second is that I asked the question from the perspective of documenting
radio history without any regard for logging of stations.  DXers would be
interested in history to varying degrees, but the perspective may be
radically different.  The two examples I gave - as well as the one Mike
Sanburn mentioned - really highlight two different perspectives ... the
listener noticing two frequency changes, and the FCC noting two call
changes.  Please note that I am not at all dismissing the DXer point of view
(and obviously welcome that point of view since I asked the question here),
but I am trying to consider as many different perspectives as possible...as
long as they hold water.

Mike

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Scott Fybush <scott@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> As for the larger question of what *should* then constitute a new logging,
> there's now a huge amount of information available for the DXer interested
> in learning the specific details of a station change. A generation ago
> (heck, even a decade and change ago), you pretty much had to go to the FCC
> in Washington to see the files that contained stations' engineering
> applications. Today, those details are as close as the FCC's own website (or
> a bunch of others, like the excellent and free FCCInfo.com, that present it
> in a more understandable form.)
>
> Or, with a bit of more sophisticated data management, one *could* say that
> any change made by a station that would alter its predicted signal strength
> at your QTH by more than some determined number (+/- 3 dB? 6 dB? 10 dB?)
> would be considered a new logging.
>
> But this is a hobby, after all, not a science. I *have* to track all these
> FCC changes because it's my job. I wouldn't want to do it as a hobby; life
> is too short, at least from where I sit. The point I'm making here is simply
> that it's probably worth having this discussion in greater depth at some
> point, given how much information is available to us *if* we want to avail
> ourselves of it.
>
>
> s
> _______________________________________________
> IRCA mailing list
> IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
>
> Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
> IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
>
> For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
>
> To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx