| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 04.10.03 11:15l 237 Lines 8697 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2086-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Oct 01, 11/11
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL3VML
Sent: 031003/1422Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:9646 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2086-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI (3)
From: "Tim Cunningham" <tim_cunningham@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 18:52:58 -0500
X-Message-Number: 70
>>Back to the example and please do not say this is plain wrong. It is the
>>reality. Of course, there are may things to fix, but the fact remains there
>>are a whole lot of dupes in this scenario. To say dupe checking really
>>works meams we really closing our eyes to the reality of what is happening
>>here.
>
>GEEZE, how many times do we have to go through this... YES!!!!! The below
>example CLEALRY SHOWS how the EXISTING SYSTEM in YOUR area is TOTALLY
>BROKEN. WE AGREE 100%! But the FAULT is not due to callsign
>substitution!
Bob, wait a minute I think you put some words in my message that simply
are not there. Where in my statement above have I mentioned anything
about callsign substitution? You might be surprised to find it nowhere. The
focus was dupes and nothing else.
>So your implication of 11 dupes due to callsign substitution is just plain
>wrong, and missleading. If you would FIX your local network to at least
>1996 callsign substution guidance, then there would only be ONE dupe.
>And that is certainly worth all the advantages of full identity and
>traceability in the network.
There is simply no implication made in the opening paragraph about callsign
substitution. NADA! You may be confusing this with another post, but I
switched gears on you... Forget about callsign substitution it is not the
topic.
It remains a fact that RELAY,WIDE,WIDE does not get dupe checked very well.
I do not see how you can argue that point. The example reeks with dupes
despite all the problems associated with the real scenario, but that was
beyond the point that dupe checking on that path is NOT very robust. There
are far more problems with the example than dupe checking and there is no
doubt about it.
Now, under the new system of only 2 hops things would be much better!
Whether it be using RELAY,WIDE or in the example it should have been
WIDE,WIDE as we all know for a fixed station the situation would have been
greatly reduced. Today, we notice that change for at least one of the
relays.
I am not fixated on call substitution as you state. It was never mentioned
in this post so I am miffed about that conclusion. I am still shocked that
the dupe checking seems to be lacking in a big way. I do not think we can
dispute this fact and that is the only point I made. Two hops changes the
picture greatly for the better in the case of the example. Yet, it is the
real world in which we live every day.
Thanks,
Tim - N8DEU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Citadel PCMCIA Drivers
From: Dale Seaburg <kg5lt@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 19:47:37 -0500
X-Message-Number: 71
Does anyone remember the Citadel computers that were offered a few years
ago?
I have the drivers.zip file, but not sure what files are needed in
config.sys and autoexec.bat to make the PCMCIA slot come alive for an ATA
Flash Card.
If anyone has any experience they don't mind sharing, I'd appreciate it.
I'd like to get one of my units running with Digi_Ned and I think this unit
and a Flash Card would be a perfect fit.
Thanks for you time.
73 - Dale. KG5LT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Silk Purses
From: "Germino" <mgermino@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 17:56:12 -0700
X-Message-Number: 72
Could you use the PSK31 waterfall or one of the other sound card audio
analyzers to adjust the Deviation? This has been an on and off again
thought for a while.
Mike
AD6AA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Correctly IDing weather stations
From: "Ken Brown" <W2KB@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 21:55:34 -0400
X-Message-Number: 73
The FCC rules merely require that the station callsign be transmitted every
10 minutes. Doing it with a beacon text is fine. You do not need to use
any digis to be legal for the ID but you might want to consider using at
least one so that any interested hams have an easier time should they want
to get in touch with you.
73,
---Ken W2KB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Silk Purses
From: "Georgette Sampson" <georgette.sampson@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 21:18:28 -0500
X-Message-Number: 74
>Could you use the PSK31 waterfall or one of the other sound card audio
>analyzers to adjust the Deviation? This has been an on and off again
>thought for a while.
I think a real deviation meter is meant to connect to the discriminator,
rather than after the filtering, so maybe in this case, it would just be an
audio analyzer.
I think it (and AGWPE's analyzer) could be used as a guide. If the high
tone goes off the chart, you know you're too high :-)
You could also use the AGWPE O'scope mode and compare to a known good
reference signal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: New Mexico LANn-N?
From: "Spider" <spider@rivcom.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:43:23 -0700
X-Message-Number: 75
>An emergency (*SAR*) presents itself near "the firewall". Amateurs from
Arizona>converge on the scene, only to find out that their RELAY,WIDEn-N
doesn't cut
>it. They realize that NMn-N is the thing to do...but when they change to that,
>they lose the ability to talk with Az to the west.
>
>What should they do? APRS is about emergency/tactical communication. Somebody
>is going to be in a world of hurt. There's too much thinking that has to take
>place.
Hi EV!
Well, depends who the comm guy is...but
1. If we had enough folks with trackers, we'd likely only use 144.39 as a
'local' tactical communications and to gather whatever local sensor data
might be available to help determine local near real time enviromental
conditions. Likely, our map view would not extend 20 miles and that would
be a very very large search area for us. The ONLY thing that would really
bother us are people using EXCESSIVE paths disrupting 'local' tactical
communications.
2. Any messaging would be better handled on the SAR freqs and statewide
public service networks, cell phones and sat phones, not APRS. To be very
honest, unless it's a very extended search, the need for Amateur Radio
Operaters specifically, is small.
3. I think using SAR for your example is terrible! Some form of major
disaster would have been better! ;)
Jim, WA6OFT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cheap GPS receivers / RS232 / Digitraveller
From: "J. Lance Cotton" <joe@lightningflash.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:01:17 -0500
X-Message-Number: 76
I posted a short (!) description of the mod I did to this GPS. It will
allow you to use the cable that came with the DigiTraveler to hook it to a
TinyTrak directly (add your own DB9).
http://w5ac.tamu.edu/~kj5o/digi_traveler_mod.html
73 de Lance KJ5O
--
J. Lance Cotton, KJ5O
joe@lightningflash.net
Three Step Plan: 1. Take over the world. 2. Get a lot of cookies. 3. Eat the
cookies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: New Mexico LANn-N?
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:20:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 77
You missunderstand completely.
Every digi still responds to RELAY and WIDE. Thus the universal path for
mobiles would still work in NM EVERYWHERE. More comments b elow
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: New Mexico LANn-N?
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:25:16 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 78
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Ev Tupis (W2EV) wrote:
>The new paradigm should be the development of automated APRSniffers that
>tell people the correct UNPROTO for a given area, while leaving the
>network as it is for special cases if/when they present themselves.
I dont think you are keeping up with the idea.
1) RELAY/WIDE will continue to work EVERYWHERE
2) WIDEn-N will continute to work most everywhere that can tolerate it
3) ANyone that arrives in San Diego and notices that ALL fixed statiosn
are using the path of SDn-N might consider using that path if they have to
go farther than RELAY,WIDE (they dont for 98% of San Diego)
4) Same goes for anyone arriving in New Mexico.
EVERYTHING still works, but the new n-N paradigm give the local SYSOPS the
ability to actually MANAGE their resources, not be totally vulnerable to
all the mistakes that everyone can possibley make.
de Wb4APR, Bob
---
END OF DIGEST
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
