[aprssig] More digis are changing to the new paradigm

[n2lbt at spamcop.net]

On Jul 4, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Earl Needham wrote:

> At 03:31 PM 7/4/2005, n2lbt at spamcop.net wrote:
>
>> I don't think the new paradigm recommends a specific amount of hops.
>>
>
>         Then why is there so much commotion about using no more  
> than WIDE2-2 or WIDE3-3?

These are usually regional type discussions. Where WIDE3-3 might be  
ok in WV,or NC, WIDE2-2 is the maximum in the Northeast.

>
>> Nor prevents anyone from using long directed paths. If you think you
>> can break the laws of physics, and reliably communicate over 5 hops
>> go for it. Now one will stop you, unless your packets are interfering
>> with other areas as has been reported here in the past.
>>
>
>         Somebody reported ME interfering with other areas?  I'd  
> like to see the reports!

Well you say 5 and 6 hops are ok, but it looks like everyone doesn't  
agree with you.



Begin forwarded message:

> Date: February 23, 2004
> To: "TAPR APRS Special Interest Group" <aprssig at lists.tapr.org>
> Subject: [aprssig] Re: Wider paths than Wide2-2
>
> Maybe not, but your packets from west Texas and NM quite often come  
> into
> the DFW area where we do have a high channel load.  Having digipeaters
> and home stations ID'ing with WIDE5-5 and above do cause  
> interference in
> the DFW area even though not intended.  I, for one, don't care to  
> see a
> Midland or Roswell digi show up on RF in the DFW area.  Point being:
> just because your area has a low channel load doesn't mean that 2 or
> three digis away isn't a completely different story.