[chirp_users] New user

[John B. Leonard Jr]

As far as I'm concerned, CHIRP is an invaluable resource, esp., since 
it's developed and maintained by volunteers.  Were I to pay for 
something, I'd feel entitled to complain.  But CHIRP's different.  And 
the fact that these volunteers are keeping up with over 80 models of 
radios, not just the UV-5, earns, IMHO, much more respect and gratitude 
for its functionality.

And current frequencies I can easily get off the internet.  I don't rely 
on CHIRP to be a "one-stop" source for all my radio needs.

Keep up the great work, folks, and thanks.

73's

Barry Leonard
W9JBL
DeKalb, IL


On 04/15/2015 09:01 AM, John LaMartina ☀ wrote:
> Just for clarification, CHIRP was developed by a group of strictly volunteers to provide programming support for over 80 different models of transceiver, Not to provide frequency information for your area. Any data supplied is as a sample only.
>
> It is the Users responsibility to acquire accurate data for their area, not CHIRPs. There are tens of thousands of repeaters and frequency combinations. Each source, such as Radio Reference, is responsible for their own sites accuracy. The junk in, junk out you are referring to is not CHIRP's responsibility. I recommend your contacting these data providers directly.
>
> John
> Http://www.miklor.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 15, 2015, at 1:57 AM, Mike <wa4yur at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As a new user chirp is still a learning experience. The data that is used in the download sites is old and outdated on the ones that it would let me access. It would not let me look at all of the sites so I can't comment on all of them. The one that I was able to access still has repeaters listed in my area thy have been off the air for at least five years. I realize this is something chirp can not control to a certain extent but they could get a site that is more up to date and dump the sites that are still in the dark ages with their lists. I had some problems trying to down load data but I think it's due to not being use to using chirp so I need more time with the program to comment there. One site I have found that is reasonably correct on their data is Artsi but even they have a few lists that are not accurate but they seem to have more accurate data than most others.radio reference is pretty close on some stuff but has old data on others. The data that comes up when y
>   ou
>>   download chirp and look at what is there is not accurate at all. It doesn't even show the repeater offset on some and on the vhf marine channels some of the channels are not even in the marine service they are public safety frequencies. All in all chirp is a good idea but it really needs some data updating and corrections by someone that is familiar with FCC band plans and repeater inputs and outputs and what frequencies are assigned to what radio services. This would make chirp a really great and very useful program. As the saying goes junk in junk out.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> _______________________________________________
>> chirp_users mailing list
>> chirp_users at intrepid.danplanet.com
>> http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users
>> To unsubscribe, send an email to chirp_users-unsubscribe at intrepid.danplanet.com
> _______________________________________________
> chirp_users mailing list
> chirp_users at intrepid.danplanet.com
> http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users
> To unsubscribe, send an email to chirp_users-unsubscribe at intrepid.danplanet.com
>

-- 
Gen. Ennis C. Hawkes: "Don't tell me about your little problems! I'm only interested in results!"
- "Strategic Air Command"