Re: [IRCA] Opinions requested on documenting station swaps

[Russ Johnson <radiok3pi@xxxxxxxxx>]

I like that Facility ID number as the identifier.  Hmm....any way to get
that incorporated into the AM Log?

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Scott Fybush <scott@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mike Hawkins wrote:
>
>> I'm playing with radio station history again and I'm doing battle with
>> myself about how to document station swaps.  I'll give two examples.
>>
>> Example #1:  A few years back, KLOC/920/Ceres CA format moved to
>> KVIN/1390/Turlock CA, and the KVIN format moved over to KLOC.  The call
>> letters swapped with the format change.  From a listener's perspective,
>> that
>> is a frequency change and the city change is transparent to the listener.
>>
>>> From the FCC perspective, its two call letter changes for two separate
>>>
>> facilities and who cares about the formats.
>>
>> Example #2:  Recently, KERN/1410/Bakersfield CA swapped formats and call
>> letters with KERI/1180/Wasco CA.  As with example #1, the listener finds
>> their favorite station on a new frequency, and the city change is
>> transparent.  The FCC sees it as two call letter changes for two
>> facilities.
>>
>> I'm on the fence and looking for opinions on how this should be properly
>> documented.
>>
>
> There's really no difference between those examples from the FCC's point of
> view.
>
> Let me back up a little: when the FCC implemented its current database
> system (CDBS, "Consolidated Database System") in the 90s, it moved away from
> using callsigns as the primary internal identifier for each station.
> Instead, they assign each station a unique "facility ID number."
>
> So to the FCC, 1410 in Bakersfield is "6640" and 1180 in Wasco is "35899,"
> and all that happened, as you correctly note, was that 6640 changed calls
> from KERN to KERI and 1180 changed calls from KERI to KERN. However it was
> promoted to listeners - "KERN Newsradio is moving to 1180!" - is of no
> interest to the FCC.
>
> Having said that, then, the guidance I'd offer is to treat call swaps like
> this no differently from the way you'd handle any other call change. If
> you'd have counted a new logging if 1410 had changed calls from KERN to
> KQPX, then you should also count it as new if you logged them after changing
> from KERN to KERI. But if you don't count a garden-variety call change as a
> new logging, there's no reason to treat these swaps as new loggings.
>
> (Given the rapidity with which callsigns change these days, and the fact
> that a call change by itself makes no difference in a station's DXability, I
> am not in favor of counting call changes as new loggings, period, but that's
> a separate discussion.)
>
> 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.)
>
> So the technology and data exist (at least for US and Canadian stations)
> for us to slice and dice the definition of "new logging" however we'd like.
> Many of us maintain "home" DX logs that contain only loggings made within 25
> miles of our QTH. One could do the same with transmitter sites: if a station
> moves more than 25 miles, consider it a new logging. (That would handle the
> "what to do with KTRB" question neatly.)
>
> 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
>
>


-- 

*
The beginning of wisdom is to recognize the world as it is, not as
what we wish it to be.
*
_______________________________________________
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