CHIRP

Also, if you do add this, please add a column for distance, so stations can be sorted using that.
Thank you.

I'm not sure why this would be worth the trouble to make it happen. The data dump available from that site appears very much intended for humans and not machines, and so there's quite a bit of massaging that would be required to make CHIRP able to digest it. That also means that any variations (in what appears to be hand-edited data) would be potential bugs or issues.

Further, it looks to me like basically all that data is already in RepeaterBook. Excluding the DMR entries (CHIRP doesn't support any DMR radios currently), it appears that RepeaterBook has more entries for 2-meter repeaters in CT (just taking that one as an example). Also, the data available in RepeaterBook is far richer and intended to be machine-readable. There's no information in the NERD for where these repeaters are, other than state/county/town, which makes your request for "sort by distance" basically impossible without a lot of work to reverse-geocode place names and then end up with highly inaccurate distance estimations. RepeaterBook contains lat,lon coordinates for everything.

I'm sure you made this request for a volunteer to spend their time on this for a reason - can you explain further why this would be a valuable use of resources? And why RepeaterBook (which covers the entire planet) is not sufficient?

Dan Smith wrote in #note-2:

I'm not sure why this would be worth the trouble to make it happen. The data dump available from that site appears very much intended for humans and not machines, and so there's quite a bit of massaging that would be required to make CHIRP able to digest it. That also means that any variations (in what appears to be hand-edited data) would be potential bugs or issues.

Further, it looks to me like basically all that data is already in RepeaterBook. Excluding the DMR entries (CHIRP doesn't support any DMR radios currently), it appears that RepeaterBook has more entries for 2-meter repeaters in CT (just taking that one as an example). Also, the data available in RepeaterBook is far richer and intended to be machine-readable. There's no information in the NERD for where these repeaters are, other than state/county/town, which makes your request for "sort by distance" basically impossible without a lot of work to reverse-geocode place names and then end up with highly inaccurate distance estimations. RepeaterBook contains lat,lon coordinates for everything.

I'm sure you made this request for a volunteer to spend their time on this for a reason - can you explain further why this would be a valuable use of resources? And why RepeaterBook (which covers the entire planet) is not sufficient?

I guess it is just that NERD is more easily searchable.
https://www.nerepeaters.com/searchNE.htm

If you want to find all 2 meter repeaters within 10 miles of Spencer, a little typing and a couple of clicks, and you're done. Oops, want 30 miles to see what is out there? Easy-peasy. Going on vacation to Eastham, same thing. Export all those to a map, no problem, one click. It would be SO nice to export them to be able to copy and paste them into Chirp to put in the radio every time you want to look something up. Repeaterbook is not as easy to do this in. I didn't realize this would cause someone so much distress. Sorry for asking. Maybe I should put this in as a request to the Repeaterbook people instead. The interface to Repeaterbook from within Chirp is pretty rigid and it resets every time you go back to change one thing.

Thanks anyhow.