[aprssig] MIC-E and APRS
needhame1 at plateautel.net
Fri Mar 4 11:55:41 CST 2005
At 10:31 AM 3/4/2005, Phillip B. Pacier wrote:
>Earl Needham wrote:
>> I get the feeling that, for this to happen, we'll have to go
>> from a point where APRS is a primary operation to a point where APRS is
>> simply an add-on that EVERYBODY does. I mean, right now, most of us who
>> run APRS have dedicated 2-meter rigs for that, a TNC, GPS, etc. It's
>> basically a second station in out house or vehicle. At some point, we
>> may or may not move to a spot where the PRIMARY station does it all.
>I think the original plan for Mic-E was that 2-meter (or other) voice
>repeaters would be set to receive the APRS packet burst at the end of a
>voice transmission. For example, you would key up and talk to your buddy,
>and when you unkey, the Mic-E device sends the packet burst. I know the
>D7 can be set to do this. It sounds like an annoying courtesy tone, but
>it works if the repeater is set to receive the burst. From there, an
>interface could route the packet from the voice repeater to 144.39 and/or
>to the internet. If you can get past the annoying burst of noise, it is a
>very efficient way of beaconing.
I agree, and let me add that I've seen plans whereby the repeater
could mute the packet and it wouldn't come out on the repeater output, but
still would go to 144.39. A win all around.
But the point I was actually trying to make is that we currently
do APRS and an end unto itself. Perhaps at some point we'll do APRS
without thinking of it, and using only the voice rig, which is what MIC-E
is supposed to do anyway.
BTW, how common is MIC-E? I have a gut feeling that it isn't very
Earl Needham, KD5XB, Clovis, New Mexico DM84jk
More information about the aprssig