| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 09.02.04 15:01l 226 Lines 9312 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2804-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Feb 06, 6/9
Path: DB0FHN<DB0THA<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0IUZ<DB0GOS<ON0AR<ON0AR<7M3TJZ<IK6PYS<
ZL2TZE<ZL3VML
Sent: 040209/1228Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:18737 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2804-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: HF APRS
From: "Sean \\The RIMBoy\\" <sean@rimboy.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:28:40 -0600 (CST)
X-Message-Number: 38
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, Stephen H. Smith wrote:
>Adam Pirkle wrote on 2/6/2004, 7:22 AM:
>
> >1. Is HF APRS alive?
>
>YES, BUT.... The only band with any consistent organized HF APRS
>operation supported by 24/7 IGATEs in North America is 10 MHz (i.e. the
>"30-meter" band). [ The actual RF frequencies of the two tones of HF
>packet on this band are 10.149.200 and 10.149.400 MHz. ]
>
>No "quad band" radio is going to cover this band -- you will need a
>full-blown standard HF rig, or a "DC-to-light" mobile like an Icom 706
>or Yaesu FT-100 that could work on 2M with useful power in populated
>areas and on 30M HF in the boonies. Actually you will need two radios
>in the van if you propose to crossband repeat from 2M to HF.
FWIW, is there any reason why APRS on 10m has not taken off? I realize
we're a couple years away before band conditions get good again, but given
the relative low cost for rigs I'm not sure why it cannot become popular.
According to Bob's docs we've already got a freq designated for traffic:
http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/APRS-docs/HF.TXT
Likewise, I would think it might be another handy tool for figuring out
propagation.
Unfortunately that still does not appear to help the original poster since
those quad band yaesu's are 10m FM only.
Sean...
--
The punk rock will get you if the government don't get you first.
--Old 97's
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
KG4NRC http://www.rimboy.com Your source for the crap you know you need.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: HF APRS
From: Adam Pirkle <adam@pirkle.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:41:31 -0600
X-Message-Number: 39
Yikes. This project is starting to sound majorly expensive; the Icom 706
rig costs about $750, right? And the Yaesus just go up from there.
I think that the cost is going to kill the HF idea for me, but I'll keep it
in mind just in case a solution comes up. The inability to do crossband
communication would also be a pain (is there such a thing as a
crossband-capable mobile HF rig?), although I'm planning to borrow my dad's
TM-D700 to do 2m mobile.
It looks like satellites might be the best option.
Regards,
Adam
KE5AGK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: HF APRS
From: "Stephen H. Smith" <WA8LMF2@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:46:41 -0800
X-Message-Number: 40
Sean \The RIMBoy\ wrote on 2/6/2004, 11:28 AM:
>FWIW, is there any reason why APRS on 10m has not taken off? I realize
>we're a couple years away before band conditions get good again, but
>given
>the relative low cost for rigs I'm not sure why it cannot become
>popular.
>According to Bob's docs we've already got a freq designated for traffic:
>
>http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/APRS-docs/HF.TXT
>
>Likewise, I would think it might be another handy tool for figuring out
>propagation.
Actually there is a group using 10M APRS now -- the BeaconNet project
runs 1200 baud (VHF-style) APRS on 10M SSB rigs now precisely for this
purpose of studying propagation.
However for the normal APRS usage (i.e. reporting the positions of
mobiles ) 10M is VERY unsatifactory since even during the years of the
active sun (at the peak of the sunspot cycle). 10 meters is normally
only open for long-haul (i.e. beyond normal local 2-meter range)
propagation during the daylight hours or for just a few hours after
local sunset.
30 M by contrast:
1) Is normally open for the long haul 24/7 throughout the solar cycle
2) Is very lightly occupied since it is a non-voice-modes-only band;
i.e. less QRM than 10 when it is open.
3) Doesn't have thousands of illegal CB bootleggers operating in it as
the bottom end of 10M often does during band openings. And note that
even when they operate outside of 10M itself, the QRM, splatter and
intermodulation distortion from illegal badly-tuned CB amplifiers in the
so-called "freeband" (the range between 27.405 [CB channel 40] and
28.000 [bottom end of 10 meters] often renders the bottom end (non-voice
data part) of 10 meters itself unusable.
Stephen H. Smith wa8lmf (at) aol.com
Home Page: http://wa8lmf.com
Ham Radio/Mobile SSTV page: http://members.aol.com/wa8lmf/ham
APRS Stuff
http://members.aol.com/wa8lmf/aprs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: HF APRS
From: Frank - KG6JVE <kg6jve@pasadena.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:39:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Message-Number: 41
2 meter 1/4 antenna on the car roof works great with ISS, PCSAT and
Sapphire.
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, Adam Pirkle wrote:
>It looks like satellites might be the best option.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mapping plans
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 16:50:49 -0500
X-Message-Number: 42
On 2/6/04 at 3:00 PM James Jefferson <jj@aprsworld.net> sent:
>I think what Jeff is getting at is that there is no reason for a whole new
>mapping system to be created. There should be very little custom software
>needed besides some converters to translate aprs type maps into shapefiles.
I blame myself for failing to explain this better. I'm jammed between
dealing with houseguests, answering nearly 500 emails to me on the mapping
issue (amazing how many people haven't bothered to read the line at the top
of the pages on findU, and follow the link to read the details), and
prepping a new server. I probably haven't taken time to explain this well
enough...
True enough, you could convert just about anything into a shapefile. Anyone
that wants to write a converter for any of the APRS formats, please do so.
It would be useful in many different ways.
However, there are some real problems that must be addressed other than
writing the converters.
First, how do you deal with multiple maps covering the same area? If I
understand your statement correctly, you already have an issue with
coastlines and streets. What happens if two people submit overlapping maps
of areas? Will everything get drawn creating a mash of stuff?
How do you plan to incorportate images into this, like satellite, weather,
and aerial photos?
How you plan on getting the registration info (lat/lon/scale) back to the
client programs, or will only your code be able to draw on the maps?
The fact that you are using proprietary data is new to me, I thought you
were only using publicly available data. What are the sources of the data
you cannot share, do you have rights to share images based upon that data,
and what would it cost to equip other servers with the same data? Whatever
we do, there must be multiple sources for the maps.
>The mapserver software automatically chooses the right data to create a map
>from based on a number of criteria.
Could you elaborate more? What is the root of the coast/street issue, and
is it solvable with your code? What is the problem with Miami maps, and is
that solvable?
My idea is to use multiple different sources of maps, each with entries in
the database documenting production instruction, location, range, and
resolution. Queries from the database would produce the best map for the
situation. Parameters would allow the user to limit the sorts of maps it
might accept (like weather radar, aerial photos, raster or vector maps).
The desired image is placed in a temporary directory on the server, what is
returned from the query is a geo file with the spacial registration data
and a URL to the image.
This way, ANY application that can use a geo file could use the new server.
..and any application that added the ability to handle geo files would gain
access to the full range of APRS maps. Mobile users could get the maps they
wanted and save them to their local disk for use when not connected to the
internet. What I'm aiming for is something useful to all of APRS, not just
findU or APRSworld.
>So, the way I see it ... Steve's vision of using other APRS maps for coverage
>of the rest of the world would take about 2 person-days of time for somebody
>to write converters to shapefile .... or about 3 person-years to write a new
>mapping system. But I'm biased in this because I already have a few solid
>man-months of my time invested in a mapping system (that's on top of many
>years of time required to write mapserver).
Again, nothing I am doing here is aimed replacing your system. I had been
proceding under the impression you wanted to be part of the solution. As
I've said several times, my plan was for your server to be the default for
the US, so unless someone said they wanted a radar image, photo, or dosMap,
they would get served one of your maps.
From what I'm hearing, your 2 man/day solution results in you being able to
draw on these files, but no one else. Is that correct?
Are you are willing to provide geospacial registration of the images, and
provide addition control beyond the three zoom levels presently supported?
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
