| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 04.07.03 09:17l 234 Lines 9123 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1563-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jul 01, 2/4
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<RZ6HXA<HA3PG<JE7YGF<JM1YSB<7M3TJZ<IK6PYS<ON0BEL<
VK7AX<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 030703/1328Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:3658 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:1563-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: Gonzales Andy <agonzales@arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 15:55:18 -0700
X-Message-Number: 9
I am about to take the tech exam but have been trying to get up to
speed on APRS in the meantime. It seems to me that operating a radio
while driving alone, not to mention trying to program it or even deal
with a laptop is as dicey or more as operating a cell phone. Many
states are trying to prohibit cell phone use while driving unless its
hands free. I guess the best thing to do is either drive / operate
with a partner riding along or stop to "QSY" your setups.
I thought it odd when I was reading the section on using repeaters
that repeaters should not be used by stationary stations during
commute hours so mobiles can use it.
I took two short trips from Sunnyvale, CA to Santa Cruz CA alone last month.
I am planning a medium trip from Sunnvale, CA to San Luis Obispo, CA
later this month with my son to look at Cal Poly. He'll do most of
the driving and if I pass the exam I'll be doing the operating.
I am also planning a long trip from Sunnvale, CA to Eugene, OR in
August. Probably alone.
--
Andy Gonzales
NASA / Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000
Bldg. N-244, Rm. 240
MS 244-19
agonzales@arc.nasa.gov
650-604-0309
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@cedar.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 18:10:51 -0500
X-Message-Number: 10
At 06:43 PM 7/1/2003 -0400, Ev Tupis (W2EV) wrote:
>Alex wrote:
>>I'd carry a repeater directory, as I still think Voice Alert is bad
>>amateur radio practice.
>
>I can't help but wonder about the long threads that spoke of the need to
>offload
>APRS traffic to a faster backbone because of congestion on 144.39. Is having
>voice traffic on the APRS frequency really congruant with that line of
>thought?
>After all...all of the WIDE's in range would hear that voice conversation's
>carriers...further complicating the whole picture.
As I understand bob's proposal, he's not suggesting conversations, just
contact and move.
FWIW, I would just propose listening on 6.52, and using the PL alert to
tell you to make a call on 52 if you're interested.
The digi wouldn't hear the carrier, because there's no modem tones.
It would likely cause some packets not to be heard, that's why I wouldn't
even suggest keying up on 4.39
This also means that digis must not ever have the PL enabled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mobile APRS services
From: "Dakota Summerhawk" <dakotas@dotorg.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 17:26:49 -0600
X-Message-Number: 11
I was curious as to see if anyone has come across a palm version of the
repeater directory? I do travel a bit and having the list in palm form would
be better than carrying a book for me.
Any suggestions?
Dakota
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:47:16 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 12
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Ev Tupis (W2EV) wrote:
>Is having voice traffic on the APRS frequency really congruant with that
>line of thought? After all...all of the WIDE's in range would hear that
>voice conversation's carriers...further complicating the whole picture.
That is not what Voice Alert is about. There should not be any voice
"conversations" on 144.39. Voice alert is allowing for a "voice packet"
on 144.39 (simplex direct) for the purpose of establishing communications
with an APRS mobile in simplex range. The "voice packet" takes under 4
seconds total and only QRM's about a 5 mile radius. But 4 seconds is
comparable to a typically verbose single home station APRS packet sent via
3 hops (which also takes 4 seconds of air time over an entire state)....
And instead of happening thousands of times per hour, like packet packets,
it may typically occur maybe once a day. One has to keep things in
persepective. The concept is... "W3ABC, voice-alert. What freq U on?"
and the "ack" is "146.94 QSY!"
>On the other hand...it is a fascinating proposal...one that I'm
>considering in the CU2QSO (APRS on VHF Contesting Steroids) world on
>147.585 MHz, where Rover Radar is the whole idea and digipeating is not
>used. Since the idea is to enhance more traditional
>communication...CU2QSO is a good place to really exploit it all.
Yep, why waste the speaker on a radio when it can be muted with CTCSS and
still be available...
de WB4APR@amsat.org, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: "Richard Amirault" <ramirault@erols.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:49:46 -0400
X-Message-Number: 13
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gonzales Andy" <agonzales@arc.nasa.gov>
Subject: [aprssig] Re: MObile APRS services
(snip)
>I thought it odd when I was reading the section on using repeaters
>that repeaters should not be used by stationary stations during
>commute hours so mobiles can use it.
(snip)
I've never understood that either. As a mobile operator during commuting
hours I'd want to use my radio to talk (or to listen to others talking) It
does not matter if the people I'm talking to are in cars or houses.
Besides should an emergency occur a mobile may very well *want* to talk to a
home station (but this is less of an issue with all the mobile phones out
there these days).
Richard Amirault N1JDU Boston,
MA, USA
www.erols.com/ramirault "Go Fly A Kite"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:53:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 14
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Gonzales Andy wrote:
>I am about to take the tech exam but have been trying to get up to
>speed on APRS in the meantime. It seems to me that operating a radio
>while driving alone, not to mention trying to program it or even deal
>with a laptop is as dicey or more as operating a cell phone. Many
>states are trying to prohibit cell phone use while driving unless its
>hands free. I guess the best thing to do is either drive / operate
>with a partner riding along or stop to "QSY" your setups.
You are missing several things about APRS mobile and Voice Alert:
1) It is for mobiles that have dual band radios (Kenwood APRS radios)
2) These radios are all in one and require nothing from the operator yet
they display on the front panel the APRS data of any other passing mobile.
Since the radio has a detachable control head, it is mounted in a safe
but viewable position to the driver. Thus he never touches the radio to
get information on what is arond him..
3) One bannd is on the single, known by everyone, APRS 144.39 everywhere
in the north american continent. The other band is on whatever the
operator chooses to be on at the moment. Voice alert is only suggesting
that if you are in simplex range, you KNOW his radio is listening on
144.39 so call him there and ASK what freqnecy his band B is on, then
TALK to him there...
The APRS operator never does ANYTHING. He is already on his BAND-B. He
only answers with what that frequency is. He never fiddles with anything.
de WBAPR, BOb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: MObile APRS services
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:00:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 15
Ev wrote:
>>On the other hand...it is a fascinating proposal...one that I'm
>>considering in the CU2QSO (APRS on VHF Contesting Steroids) world on
>>147.585 MHz, where Rover Radar is the whole idea and digipeating is not
>>used. Since the idea is to enhance more traditional
>>communication...CU2QSO is a good place to really exploit it all.
Bob wrote:
>Yep, why waste the speaker on a radio when it can be muted with CTCSS and
>still be available...
AH, but EV, remember, the only reason this works is because the Kenwood
TNC is tapped off the discriminator before the CTCSS and Squelch circuits,
Thus the Radio can have CTCSS to squelch all packet noise, yet still let
voice through. A normal packet set up connected to the speaker cannot do
this or the TNC wont hear anything...
SO it is a unique situation.
Yes, it would work for your rovers if everyone connected the TNC only tot
he discriminator,but that might be unlikely... But it would be avaliable
to them if they realized how valuable it could be (Saves a radio and an
atenna for a calling channel)...
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Davis weather stations?
From: "Dakota Summerhawk" <dakotas@dotorg.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:26:58 -0600
X-Message-Number: 16
I am looking at the Davis site and what weather stations will work for APRS?
Can someone clue me in?
Thanks
Dakota
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
