Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] The Rise and Fall of the APRS Empire

kc5zrq kc5zrq at d-star.us
Sat Aug 27 03:35:03 UTC 2005


>>The truth is, if you want to communicate reliably between
>>Lubbock and Clovis, a path of about 100 miles, you need to
>>setup another digipeater.

>Can't do it!

>That would require more than the 2-hop maximum now being 
>touted.  In fact, that would require four hops.

I believe that the 2-hop, WIDE2-2, is intended to reach an
I-gate.  All the digis in Lubbock will support WIDE3-3.  The
digi KD5JTM-5 can hear most of Lubbock.  So one hop from
KD5JTM-5, one hop from a digi that doesn't exist in
Muleshoe, then final hop from BLKWTR near Clovis.

>>Using a path with lots of hops isn't going to improve the
>>reliability of communications.  What are you hoping for? 
To
>>make a big circle over to AI5TX-1, which is also about 100
>>miles away from Lubbock's digipeaters?

>Actually, we used to route up through the Clayton area and
then 
>down through Amarillo and Plainview.

There is not a digipeater in Plainview (or Muleshoe).  And
that is not something to complain about.  It is something
YOU need to DO something about.  It is not the
responsibility of others.

Why do you need Lubbock and Clovis to be connected by VHF
RF?  I don't know that APRS was ever intended to reach far
off places.  I'm not really sure I understand what it is you
are trying to accomplish.  Are you wanting to be tracked
over a large area (Lubbock to Clovis) by RF only?  Are you
trying to send messages over a large area by RF only?  Why
can't you utilize the I-gates?  Isn't the APRS-IS designed
to work as a backbone, linking together the regional RF
systems?
--------------------------------------
   This Email Was brought to you by
               WebMail
    A Netwin Web Based EMail Client
  http://netwinsite.com/webmail/tag.htm





More information about the aprssig mailing list