| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 18.04.03 10:03l 166 Lines 4714 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1173-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Apr 15, 4/4
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<RZ6HXA<SP7MGD<VK7AX<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 030417/1045Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:64065 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:1173-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: HF APRS Suggestion
From: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:10:34 -0400
X-Message-Number: 22
>>Use "ID" if...
>> ... a station is NOT able to RX (it a TX only station such as a
>> beacon [we call 'em PROBEs in BEACONet, by the way]) or will
>> ignore any attempt to be interrogated (ie ?APRS?), such as
>> stand-alone TNC-based digipeaters.
>>
>>Use "CQ" if...
>> ... a station IS capable of RX operation and will respond to
>> remote interrogation.
<snip>
>Kenwoods goofed and did not wildcard all after "CQ" and some software
>(I think) does special processing on "ID" packets
Don't forget, this is a proposal for HF...Kenwood's are VHF transceivers.
I can't speak to the "some software" issue...if they didn't follow the
spec, then they didn't follow the spec. ;)
>Good luck. Yes it is a good idea to use identifiers like this.
>Bob
Thanks, Bob...there may be hope in unifying the BEACONet/PropNET and APRS
communities after all. :) This is a good start.
Best wishes,
Ev, W2EV
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cool APRS idea
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:58:27 -0400
X-Message-Number: 23
On 4/16/03 at 6:36 AM andrew.rich@telstra.com (Andrew Rich) sent:
>I don't know if this has been done before ?
>findu.com has by x months of data right, and in there there must be an
>occurance of a digipeater that was used to hop across a hill.
>Why don't we use findu.com to create coverage maps for digipeaters ?
>I mean we have all these full time drive surveys going on. Called APRS
>Anybody wanna have a go ?
>eg plot on a map, all stations heard vi vk4gme-3 (or local digi)
>The telco i drive for does maps all the time - drive surveys.
Showing a single digi's coverage is not easy, but I've plotted coverage of
the entire system, these are images I did and publicized in August 2000:
Seattle area:
http://www.findu.com/wa.png
Tampa-St. Pete:
http://www.findu.com/tsp.png
Each is about one month's worth of position reports.
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: QSL Question
From: Dave Kaplan <dkaplan@steffeninc.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:42:54 -0500
X-Message-Number: 24
I received a QSL card from a ham reporting a two way QSO with my packet
station via PCSAT.
Problem is I was not at the station and can not confirm he was even in
contact with me.
Does contact with a unattended station count as a QSL?
Dave
WB0WNX
Sioux City, IA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re:QSL Question
From: "Ronald Reams" <wa4mjf@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:49:04 -0400
X-Message-Number: 25
I think you answered your own question: "...and can not confirm...."
Since a QSL card is a confirmation of a contact, well, I guess it is pretty
obvious :-)
73 de Ronnie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fw: Re:QSL Question
From: "Ronald Reams" <wa4mjf@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:50:02 -0400
X-Message-Number: 26
PS: Return it with notation "Not in Log"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: HF APRS Suggestion
From: Alex <kr1st@amsat.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 03:03:36 -0400
X-Message-Number: 27
"Ev Tupis (W2EV)" wrote:
>...if they didn't follow the spec, then
>they didn't follow the spec. ;)
And maybe soon we'll be asking, which spec?
73,
--Alex KR1ST
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: HF APRS Suggestion
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:39:51 -0400
X-Message-Number: 28
On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:57:02 -0400, Ev Tupis (W2EV) wrote:
>On 28.131, participants use PSK31, rather than AX.25. They do not pack
anything
>there. Whereas, in the AX.25 world, "W2EV>HK" is actually 14-bytes long, in
the
>PSK31 world, it is actually only 7-bytes long. Adding another 2-bytes
>(especially if they carry no useful information) is not insignificant at
these
>transmission speeds.
PSK31 uses Varicode, and is not byte orientated. See:
http://www.kender.es/~edu/psk31theory.html#Information Coding
Hence, W2EV>HK is actually 72 bits long (9 bytes).
Interestingly enough, if you interested in saving some transmission time,
you can re-code what you where sending as:
w2ev>hk (lower case) it would be 59 bits long , a transmission savings of
18%. This is because Varicode is designed to save space based on the most
used characters, which are lower case and not upper case.
---
END OF DIGEST
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
