Since the Canadian database structure on the FCC databases such as FM Query is now missing or incompatible and no longer accurately available, I often use VFR Maps to supplement and verify Canadian tower locations, heights and other information online. Now all detail on these online maps in Canada is missing. Does anyone know what's going on? The Canadian option on fccdata.com is useful, but the Canadian and US Border Area Data are now both incomplete. You have to try to look at both options, and even then the data often conflicts. I know that some FCC Engineering and Technical Consultants are now putting needed Border Area Canadian records manually into the existing FCC database structure. Is this situation ever going to be corrected?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
What Happened To Canadian Detail On VFR Maps Online?
- Thread starter Schroedingers Cat
- Start date
When the FCC converted FM from CDBS to LMS, this created a problem with foreign (Canada and Mexico) FM facilities showing in LMS. In the CDBS days, the Canada and Mexico allotments appeared in CDBS like they were domestic facilities and one query format would show both. The Canada and Mexico allotment data is still in the LMS data, but it is formatted differently and you have to run a different query using the LMS tables to find this information vs. a domestic facility. This created a huge problem during the 2021 NCE Filing Window since ComStudy did not ever adopt the new LMS method of finding foreign allotments and as a result, there were many applications that were filed that did not include those allotments, especially along the Mexican border area. After this happened, I was in touch with the Comstudy folks to provide them with insight on how to find the foreign facilities. REC's systems that were used to do channel searches as well as our internal systems that were used to build studies did take these foreign facilities into consideration.
It is also important to remember that information on foreign facilities in the FCC database are based on how these allotments were reported to the US FCC (International Bureau) from the other administrations. We have seen many situations where, for example, Canada will report an allotment to the United States as a Class A, but the actual facility operating in Canada is a lower-rated Class A1. Even though the facility may be a Class A1 in Canada, it is still protected by US stations as if it was a Class A because that is how it was reported. This existed even in the CDBS days. For AM radio, there are many allotments in both countries (especially Mexico) where either the station no longer exists (because of Mexico's transition of stations from AM to FM a few years ago) or they are still there but at much higher power (such as 800 in Cd. Juarez). It is all based on the international notifications made.
I remember a case during the 2013 LPFM window when an application near Buffalo was dismissed because it tried to protect a Canadian allotment as a Class A1 even though the US records showed A. The argument was that the Industry Canada showed the facility as A1. Therefore, you will always see conflicts between the US and foreign data. The US protects foreign facilities at their maximum service classes, and each foreign allotment is treated as a circle at a distance based on the service class, as specified in the appropriate international agreement. In respect to Canada a US proposal does not have to protect any portion of the Canadian service contour that is inside of US territory. This is why sometimes, you will see directional patterns that place the interfering contour right to the border. This is not the case with Mexico. Mexico will not accept interfering overlap over US soil.
Fortunately, Canada does release a relational database and they keep it updated. For FCCdata.org, REC does have a program that retrieves the Canada database once per week and writes the data into the tables that are used for the Canada tab on the site.
Mexico, on the other hand does not have an integrated relational database. Instead, they have limited information available on Excel spreadsheets. To support the Mexico data, REC has to do a semi manual process that reads the data from the Excel spreadsheets and then goes out to a IFT (Mexico's FCC) website that retrieves KML (Google Earth) data for each facility that includes the station's actual contour and some additional technical information about the station. It is not a pretty process and we do that update about 2 to 3 times a year. To make matters even more confusing, Mexico will use the same call signs on some stations in different parts of the country and only differentiates them by state.
It is also important to remember that information on foreign facilities in the FCC database are based on how these allotments were reported to the US FCC (International Bureau) from the other administrations. We have seen many situations where, for example, Canada will report an allotment to the United States as a Class A, but the actual facility operating in Canada is a lower-rated Class A1. Even though the facility may be a Class A1 in Canada, it is still protected by US stations as if it was a Class A because that is how it was reported. This existed even in the CDBS days. For AM radio, there are many allotments in both countries (especially Mexico) where either the station no longer exists (because of Mexico's transition of stations from AM to FM a few years ago) or they are still there but at much higher power (such as 800 in Cd. Juarez). It is all based on the international notifications made.
I remember a case during the 2013 LPFM window when an application near Buffalo was dismissed because it tried to protect a Canadian allotment as a Class A1 even though the US records showed A. The argument was that the Industry Canada showed the facility as A1. Therefore, you will always see conflicts between the US and foreign data. The US protects foreign facilities at their maximum service classes, and each foreign allotment is treated as a circle at a distance based on the service class, as specified in the appropriate international agreement. In respect to Canada a US proposal does not have to protect any portion of the Canadian service contour that is inside of US territory. This is why sometimes, you will see directional patterns that place the interfering contour right to the border. This is not the case with Mexico. Mexico will not accept interfering overlap over US soil.
Fortunately, Canada does release a relational database and they keep it updated. For FCCdata.org, REC does have a program that retrieves the Canada database once per week and writes the data into the tables that are used for the Canada tab on the site.
Mexico, on the other hand does not have an integrated relational database. Instead, they have limited information available on Excel spreadsheets. To support the Mexico data, REC has to do a semi manual process that reads the data from the Excel spreadsheets and then goes out to a IFT (Mexico's FCC) website that retrieves KML (Google Earth) data for each facility that includes the station's actual contour and some additional technical information about the station. It is not a pretty process and we do that update about 2 to 3 times a year. To make matters even more confusing, Mexico will use the same call signs on some stations in different parts of the country and only differentiates them by state.
Thanks, Michi. Do you think this will be corrected so that research consultants don't have to pay the exorbitant costs after Peter Moncure sold RadioSoft/ComStudy with a noncompete agreement? That drove up all the software costs industry wide. No room for the small players anymore. Peter's original software, and particularly FMR, are timeless, if you have a computer that handles DOS based programs and have the original disks and/or an old functional computer. You can still enter the information and coordinates manually for contour overlap studies for 73.215 and some 73.213 studies. You can do it roughly with the programs on the FCC website and your site utilities, but exact ERP/HAAT overlap over water areas and borders is difficult to determine for facility maximization.
Looking at some other links, it looks like Canada wants to sell you their VFR Maps, and it is no longer available for free on vfrmaps.com, even though it was just the border areas usually covered, the same border areas relevant to radio tower information near the border.
I notice that it is often the case that there are ancient dismissed petitions for rule making and mutually exclusive US channels still in the Canadian database. Also, when doing an area search near the Canadian Border, LPFMs and translator records often preclude listings of more search relevant co channel full power stations further out from the border.
Looking at some other links, it looks like Canada wants to sell you their VFR Maps, and it is no longer available for free on vfrmaps.com, even though it was just the border areas usually covered, the same border areas relevant to radio tower information near the border.
I notice that it is often the case that there are ancient dismissed petitions for rule making and mutually exclusive US channels still in the Canadian database. Also, when doing an area search near the Canadian Border, LPFMs and translator records often preclude listings of more search relevant co channel full power stations further out from the border.
Last edited:
FYI - vfrmaps.com is not a legitimate web site - it is one of those phony "parked domain" sites. vfrmap.com is a legitimate site.
Typographical error I didn't notice. Sometimes I wish there was more time to edit. One hour is a lot better than it used to be though.
- Status