Talk:RCARES Radio Frequency Listing

From Megawiki

I thik we may want to think this through a little more. I understand the isea of memory banking areas.. 0-30 30-90 90-100 however it isn't the best Idea. There are many radios that don't have 100 memories. I think we should merely suggest a particular order. For instance, we may have radios with only 1 band or 2 bands or 3 bands or as many as 4 bands. Motorola hand helds may have 6 memories. I don't want a simplex frequency as my memory channel 1... I'd want the lakeshore repeater... it is essentially the defacto standard calling frequency in the area. We should try to order them not in type, but in priority of use, not in an emergency, but in everyday use. This would be the most convenient way as it would facillitate regular use and the familiarity of the channel order.

I think we must segregate by band. --- All 2 meter frequencies together, all 44 together, etc. This helps because not all radios have the same bands.

We should order the bands by usefulness... I think maybe

2 Meters, 440 MHz, 220 MHz, 6 Meters

This could just be done by channel number, or perhaps also by channel banks -depending on the radio, the difference being... once I find --say--- the KR9RK repeater, If I hit memory up I know the next channel is going to be (whatever)

second, segregate by popularity of use as a calling frequency as besed on a geographical location... So repeaters in te area and local simplex channels hould come first.... 145.13 would be befor 146.82 as 5.13 has a receive site in racine and 82 does not. A local simplex channel should be before a more distant repeater.

N9RGX 17:32, 5 May 2006 (CDT)

-Separated by band- by meter I don't agree on priority of usefulness, just yet. Activations plans should determine that. Not documented here. I view this as an article of usable frequencies. You made a good point on radio type. People will have different radios. That is why i recommend we keep it as a article of usable frequencies. Other articles like Digital plan and others can specify what is used for that "plan" kb9mma has to learn how to use preferences..

The use f numbers are confusing, couldn't we just use headings? --KC9EOW 13:43, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

That's not quite what I mean.... basically I want a simpler list, this is way to complex. lemme think on it a while and see what I can do. I don't think we need to specify Six Meter and Two meter in this case, well atleast not the way you're doing it, it's adding more complexity, not less. I also do not see a distinction between simplex and repeater. I don' think we should make one, it just over complicates it. N9RGX 10:00, 8 May 2006 (CDT)

No, I mean 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 3.whatever... looks hard to read\

it's this or a table of some kind jim

I was talking about a previous version of the page. When you use number formatting as in an outline format with no headings it can sometimes be confusing and hard to read. --KC9EOW 12:37, 8 May 2006 (CDT)