[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Going Digital... Ham Radio?

On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Bill Sinbine wrote about thw worldwide linked APRS

> >You can send a packet on APRS 144.39 just about anywhere in the USA and
> >have it come out live on RF in Japan, Korea, AUstralia, Netherlands,
> >England, Germany, Switzerland, Finland, etc...  
> Hi All
> Well Bob, I thought that you were going to tell us about this ALL 
> AMATUER  "RADIO" link that aprs was using. It would be nice to see this 
> type of system done on ALL radio and not go to the
> "amateur radio/internet. Why not use RADIO i.e. hf to make the link with 
> down under instead of NON amateur means???? You already have a aprs hf 
> frequency right????

Because the bandwidth of the internet is MEGABYTES and it is FREE and
RELIABLE and REDUNDANT and it can handle the traffic of over 10,000
simultaneouse APRS users worldwide.   COmpared to our HF freq which is at
300 baud and can only handle about 80  users full time...

AND remember, that the INTERNET links are IDENTICAL to packet links, so
that if the INTERNET goes down anywhere, then ANY PACKET link can bridge
the gap!  Talk about the ultimate emergency response system!

> Now I know what you will say, we can do it using the satellites...

NO!  It is crazy to waste precious and infrequent satellite bandwidth with
data that can be deliverd VERY RELIABLY via other means...

> What bothers me about that is that if you only need to transmit say one 
> second and there were 10,000 people using UN attended aprs like you talk 
> about in there mobiles then that would be 10,000 seconds that the voice/ 
> digital users wouldn't be able to use the sats on each pass. I just don't 
> see the point.

Exactly.  NO ONE EVER has suggested such an unworkable idea...

> I probably should not even send this message out but I just have to.

Thanks, I am glad you did.  Maybe it will help others to also see how they
might be missunderstanding what APRS is all about...

> I just don't see the point in having a station running in your car 24/7 
> ... Even when I'm home all night and  it is just left turned on sending
> out a beacon WAY too often and never moving.

I agree and think that is a pointless application too...

> Now don't get me wrong as I do see where aprs has MANY good uses, 
> but I just don't see why you would want to have more QRM on the air than 
> there already is.

The QRM is NOT on the air.  Its on the internet and backbones.  And it is
NOT ON ANY SATELLITES, except for a handful of people in Alaska, the
Pacific, Atlantic, Antarctica and anywhere else where someone with only
an HT needs to get a message out...

> Now if everyone that is running aprs in my area was to 
> send out there beacon on EVERY sat that they THINK they can get into then 
> that  will take several minutes away from my use of the sat when I'm 
> sitting here trying to use voice on the birds or even trying to send a 
> "packet" message on the bird.

No one will use the APRS satellites in this manner.  Why use an
infrequent, rarely in view channel, when on 144.39 anywhere, you can
communicate in real time to anyone else anywhere else on the planet?
(as long as they are within the APRS infrastructure)..

I wont bother with the rest of the points in your message, since it  just
does not apply to what APRS is doing..  On any given satellite pass, you
can count the APRS users on one hand.

de WB4APR, Bob

> You do the math. Up to one second per beacon (prob less) times the apers 
> stations in the foot print of the bird doing nothing more than running in 
> auto mode and you tell me how much time is going to be taken away. I know 
> that you say that it is just a real short burst Bob, but a LOT of short 
> bursts add up to a lot of time.
> I can't wait for the "APRS sat to be sent up that was talked about several 
> messages ago.
> Like I said above, why is it frowned  apon to use the hf frequency that is 
> already in place and that the APRS group is pushing the Igate setup?? Is it 
> because that you might think that there would be TOO many one second bursts 
> and the frequency would be bogged down?? Do you think that the same thing 
> would happen on the sats if ALL of these stations were to start using the 
> sats to toss their beacons out?
> I guess I will stop here and go and put my flame suit on as I know what 
> some of the replies will be. I can take it and that is why I'm sending this 
> message out. I thought about this for a long time and someone needs to say 
> it. I just don't think we need 10,000 one second beacons on our sats.!!!!
> Lets see where it will go from here. I will answer any posts that have 
> something good to say, the flames will just be put out!!
> 73, Bill N4XEO
> E- Mail mailto:n4xeo@amsat.org
> home page: http://www.qsl.net/n4xeo
> F.A.D.C.A.: http://www.fcrosby.com/fadca
> FPAC http://www.qsl.net/fpac
> ICQ: 19219163


Reply mail addr:   wb4apr@amsat.org   
US mail address:   115 old Farm Ct, Glen Burnie, MD 21060
See DAYTON97 HISTORY:    http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/dayton.html
See Maryland APRS LIVE:  http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs.html
See GPS on ANY radio:    http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/mic-e.html

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org