Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] The Rise and Fall of the APRS Empire

Steve Slay snslay at swbell.net
Sat Aug 27 10:39:08 UTC 2005


Earl, I am with you man!



Steve Slay
KC5MVY
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not 
sure about the
former."    Albert Einstein



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "kc5zrq" <kc5zrq at d-star.us>

To: "TAPR APRS Mailing List" <aprssig at lists.tapr.org>

Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 10:35 PM

Subject: Re: [aprssig] The Rise and Fall of the APRS Empire





>
> 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.



KD5JTM-5 does not hear mobiles in Lubbock reliably!

Mobiles in Lubbock do not hear KD5JTM-5 reliably!





This is what it would happen to a WIDE3-3 from a mobile in Lubbock;

Mobile WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2

W5LCC-3 - First hop

KD5JTM-5 - Second hop

Muleshoe - Third hop

No DIGI in Clovis transmits what Muleshoe transmitted and a mobile in Clovis 
never gets the packet.



We would need four hops minimum even if there were a digi in Muleshoe.

In addition, why are we limiting ourselves to just two or three hops when 
Bob's own recommendation for West Texas and Eastern New Mexico is four hops?







Do as others have committed to do, instead of just recommending Bob's 
"fixit" page, give it a good read now!


http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html

Finally a PICTURE of APRS User Density! :

The map below is very revealing. Imagine concentric rings around the HIGH 
density areas. Assuming that we want to limit to only 2 hops all packets in 
the RED areas, then digis in those areas must not support anything above 
WIDE2-2. But the next tier of digis out from these areas need to trap 3-3 
and above packets. The next tier of digis out, has to trap 4-4 and above, 
etc. But most areas with digipeaters are within 4 hops of one of these 
areas, so I think that ALL APRS digis everywhere should trap out at least 
5-5 through 7-7 everywhere. And lets consider looking closely at where even 
4-4 is needed, and add digipeaters or igates so that we can try to get down 
to a national recommendation of 3-3 and below everywhere except for special 
circumstances and 2-2 in all the big metro areas?





Bob speaks about the first 3 tiers needing to trap 3-3 and 4-4.  Looking at 
the map on the page, there are 11 categories of density.  WIDE2-2 is 
recommended for the first 4 categories.  Does this mean category 5 could 
support WIDE3-3 and category 6 could support WIDE4-4?

West Texas and Eastern New Mexico are in categories 8,9, &10!

Stop preaching WIDE2-2 for West Texas and Eastern New Mexico!  It's no good 
for people traveling around the country side.  If someone needs to run a 
wider path, let them.



Why do we care if a packet from West Texas or Eastern New Mexico might get 
to Dallas.  According to the recommendation, it should get trapped two tiers 
outside of Dallas anyway.

Why should we in low density, spread out areas kill wide area APRS  because 
places of high density won't even follow the recommendation and fix their 
own digis?



> It is not the responsibility of others.



Well apparently it is.  We are being always being asked (more like whined 
at) to hop right on over to the nearest I-Gate only.  I hope there is more 
to Amateur RADIO than I-Gates.




> Why do you need Lubbock and Clovis to be connected by VHF
> RF?

It's a little thing called AMATEUR RADIO!







>  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.



AMATEUR RADIO!





> Are you wanting to be tracked
> over a large area (Lubbock to Clovis) by RF only?



Of course he does.



> Are you
> trying to send messages over a large area by RF only?  Why
> can't you utilize the I-gates?



I-gates don't help with tracking, because most of them were not written to 
allow position reports to be transmitted along with messaging.  The few that 
were, hardly ever get that feature turned on.  Is it active on your I-Gate?







> Isn't the APRS-IS designed  to work as a backbone, linking together the 
> regional ?> RF systems?



It is "designed"  that way, just not implemented yet!  And that's why two or 
three hops only is killing APRS in every place other than the Red, White, 
Yellow, and Aqua areas.  Look at the map.






> --------------------------------------
>   This Email Was brought to you by
>               WebMail
>    A Netwin Web Based EMail Client
>  http://netwinsite.com/webmail/tag.htm
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig







More information about the aprssig mailing list