|On Sep 28, 2018, at 21:18, Sherrod Munday <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:|
One of the things I’m trying to figure out is whether the registrations that are submitted without a corresponding frequency study (i.e. to save money with the understanding that no protection from interference is available) are listed in the Coordination table of the database, or are being way-laid on the sidelines until the end of the filing window.
Okay, guys and gals, go give it another visit and see if the sites that you thought were missing are showing up now.
After spending a bunch of time digging through the database, I have updated the map to show three new categories:
* New registrations of dishes *with* frequency coordination, submitted during the freeze (after April 19, 2018)
* New registrations of dishes *without* frequency coordination, submitted during the freeze (after April 19, 2018)
* Miscellaneous “other” registrations
The third is a “catch-all” for locations that don’t have the flag set in the database to indicate the filing is a freeze-related filing. There are some older registrations in that last category, but there are also newer ones for which the FCC (or the filer) didn’t somehow mark the application in the database as being submitted as a result of the filing. (Some of those newer ones have descriptions clearly indicating the filing is due to the freeze, but I’m guessing someone forgot to mark it appropriately when entering it on the FCC’s end.) And, unfortunately, some of the sites in this category are not C-band downlink registrations, but there’s no effective way (that I can see) to filter them out without some extensive database cleanup (not something I’m up for on >8,000 records after lots of other filtering has been applied).
I’ll say this much in closing: I’ve heard/read lots of comments that the FCC’s database is error-ridden and needs to be updated. And, after spending *way* too many hours trying to make heads or tails of it, I can definitely vouch for the fact that it is —to put it nicely — "inconsistent.”
For a few examples, the system shouldn’t allow someone to register a satellite downlink with an operating frequency of 3.7 to 4.2 **MHz** but more than one is registered that way. And, people shouldn’t be registering longitudes in the Eastern Hemisphere (last time I checked, the FCC doesn’t regulate facilities in China). Nor was I aware that Iowa and California are off the coast of Chile in South America. :-)
And no, I didn’t correct those particular entries on the map. GIGO.