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

Re: Crossband repeat on ISS



>Who is going to "syncronize" all this?  An NCS station 
>has the same 10 minutes that everyone else has
> via satelite to control the activity.  How does the 
>next NCS know when it is his/her turn to take over? 

Thanks for the discussion.  Here would be my response:
Easy.  Just like on HF under changing band conditions.
The first net control invites the next net-control to check
in as soon as he is in range and the two of them discuss 
the handoff.

> Who will hold the cell phone equiped browser for 
>the HT-ARROW-TAPERECORDERLOGGING portable 
>station that already does not have  enough hands...
>so it is "fair" for all wanting to get in?. 

He needs nothing more than he normally uses for
operating.  He listens, and transmits when invited.
Lets say he is 14 years old, operating with an HT
in MIssissippi using a W4XXX callsign.  If the net 
control does not ask for checkins from Kids, students, 
portables, HT's , 4's or W4's or stations from Mississippi, 
or ("any others"), then he doesnt transmit this pass, 
but enjoys listening.

> Who smacks the hand of the longwinded half-
>duplex user calling CQ SATELITE for ten minutes 
>that has a bigger gun than either NCS in range? 

The net-control.  But if he is unsuccessful, there
is nothing anyone can do whether it is a directed
net or not.  In that case, I would announce something
like this:  "apparently K3XXX doesnt hear us, and
since he is blocking low power users, are there
any big guns that would like to check in on top
of him, call now?"

We cant solve all the problems of inproper operation,
but we can eliminate collision and contention and
greatly improve efficiency by having a net control
in charge.  Besides it will better train us all for
real emergency and special event operations.

I think it is worth trying, but it will take a while
for the new paradigm to become efficient until
some stations finally accept that the golden
rule works on Ham radio.

just a thought...

de Wb4APR, Bob

Robert Bruninga wrote:

>>>My opinion...[is] that we recognize the facts and 
>>>simply change our operating to match the situation. 
>>>[and operate as directed nets...]
>>>      
>>>
>>I do remember that the directed nets on AO-40 and 
>>A0-13 went very orderly.  Again, the "Quick passes" 
>>of LEO's do not allow this sort of thing.
>>    
>>
>
>Ah, but it depends on what is meant by "this sort of 
>thing".  If one's expectations are that a net control 
>will somehow be able to manage 100 checkins and let
>each one of them make a contact during 10 minutes, 
>then one is simply not understanding that this is impossible.
>
>The purpose of the directed net is to allow the resource
>to be used successfully and efficiently by a smaller 
>number but in a meaningful way.   THe status quo 
>has been to just let everyone of the 100 transmit
>williy-nilly in a congestion limited/power limited way
>so that nothing really gets communicated.  The result
>is only a few big guns get to say a few sentences.
>Lets say about a dozen are "successful" out of the
>100 trying.
>
>But the intelligence throughput is very low and the
>frustration is very high and it is only the big guns
>(usually) that get to use it at will.  The actual throughput
>of intelligence is on the order of 30% maybe.  All the
>rest of the time it is collisions with no one getting through.
>
>It is simply impossible to get 100 stations with success 
>anyway.  We must simply recognize that and re-define
>how the limited resource is used.
>
>But,  by having a net control managing who transmits,
>when, then the "success" rate of voice throughput
>should go up to say 90% (triple the throughput) and
>instead of meaningless disjoint snippets of half-completed
>QSO's, we would have a somewhat more meaningful
>dialogs to hear.   No, not everyone (of the 100) will
>be able to participate, but the few dozen that do, will 
>be heard and heard well without collisions, and will be 
>able to add intelligence to the net, rather than just 
>inserting their call into bedlam.
>
>It will be much more enriching and entertaining.  I 
>envision, net controls will think of all kinds of neat
>and entertaining things to do.  They will go to special
>places to operate portable, or will have specialty 
>checkins.  Could even do some SSTV, or call for
>antique car checkins, or handheld-only passes.
>Special events would be routine from school demos
>to scout meetings to operating from a canoe.
>
>The bottom line is that instead of hearing senseless
>babble from bedlam, the passes would be fun and
>entertaining to LISTEN TO, and challenging and
>exciting to set up.  And users would respect it because
>HAM radio knows how to operate a directed net.
>There is only one simple  rule to follow, and that is
>not to transmit until invited.  Done.
>
>Yet, it is egalitarian, since anyone from a big-gun
>to a handheld can sign up to be netcontrol for any 
>given pass and HE can define how that pass will
>operate and everyone can see in advance what
>may be of interest to them, or just tune in and
>listen to ham radio at its finest.
>
>de Wb4APR, Bob
>----
>Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org 
----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home