| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 11.09.06 23:43l 348 Lines 11692 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 8746-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: [APRSSIG] Vol 27 #9, 2/2
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<DK0WUE<7M3TJZ<ZL2BAU
Sent: 060911/2132Z @:ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC #:3592 [Waimate] $:8746-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 20:09:54 -0500
From: "John Habbinga" <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] GPS18 USB & NMEA
This might be worth checking into.
http://www.franson.com/gpsgate/guide.asp?section=Garmin_USB_GPS_200&platform=wip
nx
--
John Habbinga, KC5ZRQ
Lubbock, Texas
http://find-you.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?call=KC5ZRQ*
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 18:22:53 -0700
From: "Cap Pennell" <cap_at_cruzio.com>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
The general consensus? Don't do it. If needed, use a local
keyboard-to-keyboard frequency instead.
73, Cap KE6AFE
------------------------------
[commercial content deleted]
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 23:59:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William McKeehan" <mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
How much APRS activity? I currently have an ALOHA Circle that is around 100
miles and a total of 279 stations in my heard list (24 hour life cycle).
Packet goals are to use packet to transfer longer messages or files,
primarily to prepare for doing such during events where such needs present
themselves.
We have worked on the APRS network on 144.39 so that the local area is very
well covered; There are no packet digi's around, only a couple of high-level
"nodes" (X-1J4 I think). I was thinking that we could take advantage of the
work that has gone into the APRS network.
What I don't know is how well traditional packet would play with the existing
APRS network. If I have a node on 144.39, will it kill the APRS traffic while
it's working or would the APRS traffic be able to squeeze in.
I appreciate the feedback; I know very little about traditional packet.
--
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 00:01:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William McKeehan" <mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
Nothing wrong ith 145.something except that it does not have the digi
infrastructure that is on 144.39.
See my other note about activity and goals.
I'm really looking for reasons to give someone to NOT put a packet node (BBS
or just PBBS) on 144.39.
--
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 00:03:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William McKeehan" <mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
This response is basically what I expected to hear (except a lot more people
jumping on me for even thinking about it).
I would like to hear some logic as to why it's a bad idea.
On Fri, September 8, 2006 9:22 pm, Cap Pennell said:
>The general consensus? Don't do it. If needed, use a local
>keyboard-to-keyboard frequency instead.
>73, Cap KE6AFE
--
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 22:36:27 -0600
From: Joel Maslak <jmaslak-aprs_at_antelope.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
On Sep 8, 2006, at 10:01 PM, William McKeehan wrote:
>I'm really looking for reasons to give someone to NOT put a packet
>node (BBS or just PBBS) on 144.39.
Some reasons:
Connected mode packet doesn't work well on congested airways. It gets
exponentially slower as more traffic is added to the air. So you don't
want to mix with APRS for that reason.
Collisions have relatively little effect on APRS - the packet(s) get
garbled, but the collision doesn't ADD to the traffic (through
retransmissions) unlike connected mode, where collisions cause MORE
traffic, causing MORE collisions, causing MORE traffic, etc.
Because there are a lot of stations on 144.39, most probably can't hear the
others direct. So the chance of collisions is MUCH higher than it would be
otherwise.
Perhaps this is an application for APRS bulletins instead? One benefit of
bulletins over connected mode packet is that if a lot of stations are
interested in the bulletins, they don't all need individual copies sent to
each station. In addition, they will be gated to the Internet without any
additional work - unlike connected mode packet, opening up other
possibilities (a display in the county's EOC, without needing permission
for additional antennas, etc?).
The existing APRS digis probably aren't configured to allow connected mode
packet to be digipeated through them.
Do you really want to do connected mode packet on a channel where probably
half your users are using a radio with a HALF SECOND transmit delay?
Additional traffic that D7s and D700s can't decode will make it harder for
the Kenwood users to see the true APRS traffic.
Connected mode packet through multiple digis is flaky at best. ESPECIALLY
on a congested channel! So, you are basically limited to using one digi.
If this is for a local group, it might be just as good to just colocate the
node with the digi, both on different frequencies (perhaps use 70cm to
reduce interference?)
Speaking of interference, packet on 70cm (or other band) instead of 2m
would mean you wouldn't have nearly the same amount of desense on nearby
HTs using the club voice repeater on 2 meters... APRS isn't nearly as big
of a deal on 2m - one packet every few minutes, vs. connected mode packet
with much more frequent packets.
One thing you might look at is whether or not there are too many extremely
high WIDEs - if there are, perhaps you could convert one or two of them to
another frequency and use them for traditional packet. They are probably
hurting the APRS network anyhow.
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 22:00:39 +1000
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec_at_tech-software.net>
Subject: [aprssig] Path loss question
When dealing with RF, does the free space path less increase with frequency?
Andrew Rich
Amateur radio callsign VK4TEC
email: vk4tec_at_tech-software.net
web: http://www.tech-software.net
Brisbane AUSTRALIA
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 08:43:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bob Bruninga " <bruninga_at_usna.edu>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Path loss question
Yes,
Path loss increases with the SQUARE of frequency.
Thus from 2m to 70cm is about -9 dB
de Wb4APR, Bob
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 06:17:11 -0700
From: "Home Andy" <kg6rwo_at_comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
APRS pretty much saturates many areas. Packet nodes should probably not be
conflicting
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 08:50:59 -0500
From: Jim Duncan <jdbandman_at_earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
Connected traffic frames takes precedence over unconnected (UI) frames. To
place connected traffic on an APRS channel would pretty well shut down the
flow of APRS traffic. The whole point of using unconnected protocol is to
have traffic moving WITHOUT the need for the user to know/understand the
network.
I think you're asking for trouble here. Do you REALLY want people reading
bulletin board messages, connected keyboard chatting, etc. making your APRS
tracking information take a secondary precedence?
Granted, the prevalence of internet email has pretty well reduced packet
BBS use and what bulletin boards that are still out there exchange/forward
traffic on UHF backbones.
If you introduce connected packet traffic be prepared to answer the
onslaught of angry APRS users who want to know why this was done and why it
shouldn't be on the traditional packet radio frequencies. There is no
advantage for the APRS system in having nodes on the frequency, at least
not at the current state of development.
Perhaps down the road the coders will develop a way to use nodes and
backbones but, again, the interent datastream beats that by about a million
miles which begs the question: "What's the point?"
--
Jim Duncan, KU0G
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 08:07:54 -0600
From: Earl Needham <needhame1_at_plateautel.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
At 01:43 PM 9/8/2006, William McKeehan wrote:
>What is the general concensus about having a packet node on 144.390?
Don't do it! It just gets in the way of APRS, which is about the only
thing we should support on 144.39.
We had a similar discussion several years ago, here's what I have from back
then. Maybe I was confused, but I think there are some "nodes" out there
already, and then there is some confusion over just what is a "node" and
what is a "digi". If we can get back to using the proper terms, we'll go a
long ways in getting actual "nodes" off of 144.39.
7 3
Earl
At 08:41 PM 9/15/2003, Earl Needham wrote:
>At 05:18 PM 9/15/2003 -0700, Spider wrote:
>>From: "Bob Bruninga" <bruninga_at_usna.edu>
>><snip>
>>>The APRSdos DIGIS.TXT file recommends a local (direct) packet every 10
>>>minutes so that local users (or visitors, or whatever scenario develops)
>>>never have to wait long to be updated. Beyond that we figured a single
>>>WIDE hop once every 30 minutes or so, and then maybe a WIDE3-3 once every
>>>few hours just so that 24/7 stations would get an awareness of the network
>>>in adjacent areas.
>>>
>>>Anything more than something like that is just QRM.
>>>bob
>>>
>>
>>Then how come the majority of Node owners do not understand this or comply
>>to this thinking?
>
>Uh -- why are there nodes on 144.39 when APRS is for UNconnected packets?
>
>Earl
At 09:41 PM 9/15/2003, Earl Needham wrote:
>At 08:27 PM 9/15/2003 -0700, Spider wrote:
>><snip>
>>"Hey IC, looky here! I show 5 nodes on the map!" You think he'd care?
>
>Let me ask again -- what purpose do nodes serve in a network that
>is all UNCONNECTED packets???
>
>Thanks,
>Earl
At 06:57 AM 9/16/2003, Earl Needham wrote:
>At 05:36 AM 9/16/2003 -0700, Spider wrote:
>><snip>
>>What are being called nodes, are actually DIGI's in mode cases. I see on
>>my map 12 nodes in my surrounding area. They are all DIGI's as they do not
>>have any 'network' interface what-so-ever!
>
>
>Here's something to look at -- I connected to the KPC-3 in my
>truck and got a node listing. I suspect you might get similar results
>anywhere in the country. I think two things are happening. First,
>people are say9ng "node" when they mean "digi". But second, I think
>there are quite a few nodes out there, too.
>
>>cmd:c truck
>>*** CONNECTED to TRUCK
>>###CONNECTED TO NODE TRUCK(KD5XB-10) CHANNEL A
>>ENTER COMMAND: B,C,J,N, or Help ?
>>N L
>>W4EBM-7* (N7UG-1) 06/20/03 07:28:01
>>VIA *N4WYK-2,WIDE4-1
>>WIDE4* (W4UNC) 06/20/03 10:42:38
>>VIA K4EG,WX4GSO-9,*N4VDE-3
>>RELAY* (N4EVA-13) 06/20/03 10:56:39
>>VIA WIDE,KA4KMA-5,*N4VDE-3
>>GIU7* (WAdGIU) 06/20/03 18:01:26
>>VIA W4AP-8,*AB4KN-2,WIDE5-2
>>REO1IN* (KB9EMW) 06/21/03 05:01:23
>>VIA *AA9MM-10,WIDE4
>>GIU7 (WA4GIU) 06/21/03 06:09:18
>>VIA WIDE5-2
>>N5SKU-7* (N5SKU) 06/23/03 05:35:00
>>VIA *K5QBM-2,WIDE3
>>FTKTEL* (KD5FTK) 06/23/03 05:54:16
>>VIA K5WH-2,*WR5AAA-6,WIDE
>>RELAY* (W5RRR-7) 06/23/03 06:39:34
>>VIA AI5TX-2,*WR5AAA-6
>>*W5PDO-7* (W5PDO-1) 06/26/03 01:13:56
>>VIA W5DIG-4,*W5DIG-12
>>RELAY (W5GB-2) 06/27/03 02:53:03
>>VIA WIDE4
>>ENTER COMMAND: B,C,J,N, or Help ?
------------------------------
aprssig mailing list
aprssig_at_lists.tapr.org
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
End of aprssig Digest, Vol 27, Issue 9
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
