| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 10.05.04 08:25l 282 Lines 11022 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3185-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Apr 20, 14/17
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0EA<DB0RES<ON0AR<7M3TJZ<JK1ZRW<WB0TAX<ZL2TZE<
ZL3VML
Sent: 040510/0647Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:23703 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3185-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: Kenwood users BEWARE!
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 80
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>Wes said:
>>Wow.... kenwood is 14% of 23,000 aprs users.
>>Wow.. that is really phenomenal!!!!
>
>You bet, and it is 70% of all mobiles!
>Subtracting out the 11,000 digipeters and Internet nodes
>and the 6400 Home stations doing nothing, and it
>reppresents the 70% of APRS users on the air
>that are actually USING APRS for something.
>
>If Kenwood users want to protect their investment
>in a radio that can display just about ANYTHING they
>need to know while moble they better speak up, or the
>XASTIR and OPEN_TRACK people plan on obsoleting
>them as soon as they can...
>
>And of course, they dont care about you, beacuse they
>can download their latest toy in 3 minutes and have no
>interest in keeping you connected to APRS... and able
>to see what is going on in your mobile.
>
>Because they want to see precision to 1 foot and could
>care less if you see anything...
>
>If they have their way, APRS becomes just an internet
>video game. Useless in most come-as-you are venues...
You should walk away from this discussion for a few hours and then re-read
what was said, then re-post again when you're in a more calm state.
The above is ridiculous/way off track.
Besides, we can download the latest toy WAY faster than 3 minutes...
--
Curt, WE7U archer at eskimo dot com
Arlington, WA, USA http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: HK21 Battery Pack
From: "K.Paul Boggs" <ab6wu@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:25:34 -0700
X-Message-Number: 81
Any ideas, or leads to obtaining the Heath Pocket Packet battery pack.
Thanks
Paul
K.Paul Boggs
ab6wu@earthlink.net
Mountain Emergency Communications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS Kenwood Radios
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 82
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>The "appliance" operators you condem are the 99% of HAM
>radio ops that show up at a HAM radio event and Operate
>and PROVIDE a SERVICE. They need a product that can
>do what is needed. They cannot afford to chase the latest
>cute ideas of the latest programmer that shows up and thinks
>he has a better way...
Referring to me perhaps Bob, or Scott? I've been into this APRS thing for
a while now, and never had the desire to buy lots of APRS client licenses
(although I did buy one) or appliance radios. Playing/learning with this
stuff is the fun part, not using it.
At one point I think I was the second one to implement Base-91 encoding,
for an embedded computer APRS unit that I was driving around with. You
asked me at that time to implement the Base-91 encoding in order to
encourage some of the APRS authors to implement it. Later I also
implemented the encoding/decoding of that in Xastir. Sorry to hear that
the Base-91 compressed format fell out of your favor. Again, it's very
useful for SAR work because of the higher resolution.
>And they dont appreciate overt attempts to obsolete the
>radio or having to buy a new version every year because
>a tiny minority needs precision to 1 foot (WHICH DOES NOT
>EXIST).
What? I've already described how it is useful for SAR work. Go back and
read earlier messages today from me. Perhaps you missed it.
>Especially when the programmer has no clue what the other
>70% of APRS appliance operators are using because he doesnt
>even own one or use one... Bob
I've been into this APRS thing for a while now, and never had the desire to
buy appliance radios or lots of APRS client licenses (although I did buy
one). Playing/learning with this stuff is the fun part, not using it.
I wear my SAR pager at all times, doing mapping/comms positions usually
when I get to the "event". We're getting APRS integrated into our
operations and will use it for our "events" a great deal I expect. I've
got TNC's, TT-II's, and now a PocketTracker, plus will be using Xastir. Why
would I need to be familiar with Kenwoods in order to perform my SAR/APRS
duties?
I wasn't talking about buying a new radio each year. Just expecting
firmware or flash upgrades from the manufacturer on a periodic basis. Video
card/motherboard/GPS manufacturers do it. Perhaps someday in the near
future Kenwood can come out with a flashable APRS rig that can keep up with
protocol changes.
--
Curt, WE7U archer at eskimo dot com
Arlington, WA, USA http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS greater precision
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 83
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Laurie - g6isy wrote:
>The spec actually says that the *default* datum is WGS84.
>Which I believe is subtly different to saying WGS84 is to be used in all
>cases.
True, but I've asked about this before, and the intent was to use WGS84 for
everything.
>Here in the UK many of us have good reasons for using a datum that is not
WGS84.>This is due to the fact that there has been virtually no mapping data
available
>to WGS84 (its nearly all OSGB36). I feel the addition of a datum identifier
>would be a great help as we will (I think) go through a long transition period
>where different users will be using different datums depending on their source
>mapping data as WGS84 mapping slowly becomes available.
We're actually in the same boat here, as most of our maps are NAD27,
but newer ones are in NAD83/WGS84.
Should go through my mail archives to find the message to the SIG from
years ago where I proposed sending the datum in the posits? I might still
have it.
I still think it a good idea, whoever proposes it.
--
Curt, WE7U archer at eskimo dot com
Arlington, WA, USA http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS greater precision
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 84
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Henk de Groot wrote:
>If WGS84 would be required by APRS then a high precision is already present
>today, just use the compressed format. The only reason why this doesn't
>work is because people just send data with a random datum. So if there is
>any need for an addition to the specification I would propose to make a
>stronger requirement for WGS84 and describe that it is required that the
>client is responsible for displaying it correctly. This is just like Bob's
>propsal completly compatible with all existing implementations but also
>much more sound (IMHO).
This if very much what I would favor, plus encouragement to all the authors
to implement Base-91 compressed posit decoding, and compressed object/item
decoding.
If anyone wants example C-code to do it, I'll provide that, no charge. It's
really not hard to implement.
--
Curt, WE7U archer at eskimo dot com
Arlington, WA, USA http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: TM-D700 And GPSTEXT
From: "Joel Black" <w4jbb@charter.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 17:46:17 -0500
X-Message-Number: 85
Does anyone know of a way to get the TM-D700 to accept more than one NMEA
sentence at a time? I'm using UI-View32 and have asked this question there
with no results.
Tnx es 73,
Joel B. Black
w4jbb@charter.net
http://w4jbb.dynalias.net/
http://webpages.charter.net/w4jbb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS greater precision
From: "Laurie - g6isy" <g6isy@dsl.pipex.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 00:06:46 +0100
X-Message-Number: 86
Henk de Groot wrote:
>The client software receives WGS84 data it so it has to convert it to
>OSGB36 to be able to display it on the OSGB36 map.
No. If accuracy is required, as the available maps are to OSGB36 then the
GPS is also set to OSGB36, not WGS84. Thus no conversion is required
>How is the sender supposed to know what datum the map of the receiver
>has? This breaks down as soon as you have 2 receivers using two maps
>with a different datum. Ths only way to get is working is to transmit
>aglobally known well specified format and have the receiver deal
>with what ever is needed to display the data correctly.
That is the trouble, the sender does not know (although it is most likely
the receiver is using maps to OSGB36). However sending only WGS84 is not
the answer. In the real world it is not possible to perform a WGS84 -
OSGB36 transformation in your head and many end users need to be able to
plot positions on OSGB36 maps without having the ability to perform the
required transformation. Adding a datum identifier (as Bob has suggested)
allows the data to be sent (and identified as such) in the required format
for the end user.
>I always assumed that APRS required the use of WGS84 so an explicit
>datum identification is not needed. It is sad to learn that this is
>not the case. If there is no uniformity on what datum is transmitted
>then we make it much more complex than it needs to be, the client
>will have to convert anyway since there is no guarantee that the
>transmitted datum corresponds with the datum of the map that happens
>to be loaded in the client.
There is no guarantee but at least if you transmit a datum you will know if
it is the same as your map. If it does match then no conversion is reqired.
If the datum does not match then you will know that you do not have the
accuracy that you might think. At present you have no way of knowing.
>I would propose to make a stronger requirement for WGS84 and describe
>that it is required that the client is responsible for displaying it
>correctly.
This is difficult when your 'client' is a paper map or a scan of one and
there are no WGS84 maps available. Unfortunately some of us live in places
where WGS84 maps are simply not available.
--
73 Laurie - G6ISY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
