Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] More digis are changing to the new paradigm

Earl Needham needhame1 at plateautel.net
Mon Jul 4 22:15:20 UTC 2005

At 04:04 PM 7/4/2005, n2lbt at spamcop.net wrote:
>On Jul 4, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Earl Needham wrote:
>>         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.

         So I guess Lubbock, Texas and the whole state of New Mexico have 
moved, because they're changing to WIDE2-2 and WIDE3-3?

>>         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
>>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.

         One report, from 16 months ago?

         Hey, anybody still having a problem seeing my station in the DFW area?


Earl Needham, KD5XB, Clovis, New Mexico DM84jk

More information about the aprssig mailing list