[aprssig] Tracker Smart Pathing
bruninga at usna.edu
Wed Mar 22 16:09:36 CST 2006
Add to Smart Beaconing,
and Proportional Pathing,
Add Proportional Power...
This one is similar but it allows more frequent beacons
but at lower power. You could get 10 second updates
at 1 milliwatt chasing someone around the parking lot.
and 30 second at 10 milliwatts for chasing around the
This idea came up years ago when we were looking
at APRS for collision avoidance for boats. THe idea
being you wanted higher rates close in, but lower
rates further out. This is a SIMPLEX concept and
not using digis. My Proportional PATHING technique
is an extension of Proportional Power to the APRS
network where distance = hops.
BUT! I am *not* proposing Proportional Power, because
it is not needed or wanted on the APRS channel, but
is just something to consider for some niche applications.
>>> johnstonwes at gmail.com 03/22/06 10:26 AM >>>
Smart pathing has nothing to do with the digipeater. It has to do with
making a tracker transmit via 1 hop often, and 2 hops less often and 3 hops
even less often.
A number of years ago I did something like this with my wife's tracker.
When I was the only one in this town running aprs, I had her car beacon
every 20 seconds DIRECT, and once a minute out 2 hops. The tracker only ran
when the car was switched on, and used a KPC3 tnc. All the settings had to
be done manually and it was a moderate aggrivation to setup. What Bob has
proposed is the the tracker have the brains to alter it's path every 2nd or
3rd transmission. Never occurred to me to have a tracker do this
Not to confuse things, but this _concept_ has been used on digipeater beacon
texts IDs for some time. The recommented ID for a digipeater is DIRECT
every 10minutes, our 2 hops every 20 or 30, and 3 hops once an hour. This
is configured in the 4 BLT buffers in the TNC. HOwever for a digipeater to
support a mobile running smart paths requires no changes to the normal
WIDEn-n configuration already setup in the digipeater.
Hope I haven't added to the confusion.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stan - N0YXV" <n0yxv at gihams.org>
To: "TAPR APRS Mailing List" <aprssig at lists.tapr.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: RE: [aprssig] Tracker Smart Pathing
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org
>> [mailto:aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Jason Rausch
>> Don't get me wrong, the internet tool are awesome and
>> a neat addition to the scheme of things, but they are
>> not my main objective. I just think alot make that
>> their main objective and it doesn't really feel like
>> radio anymore. I'll get off my soap box now, I'm done
>> with the subject.
> I guess that would depend on what you want to do. If you want others to
> track you, i.e. non hams without UI-VIEW programs, then the APRS-IS
> (Findu.com) would be the objective. If you want to have a QSO with a close
> HAM a couple of digi's away then RF would be your goal. If you live in a
> sparsely covered digi area like I do than you might want your packet to
> it to the internet so that it can even make it to the next digi. Don't
> forget that in a lot of areas without the internet these digi's couldn't
> even communicate. So while your correct I think it's important for _all_
> us to remember that a one size fits all solution probably won't work. It
> _is_ however important from the standpoint of mobiles that _any_ mobile
> traveling _anywhere_ in the US should not have to change settings just
> because they've traveled into a different area.
> More on the topic of Smart Pathing I'm reluctant to jump in and say "yes"
> lets do it because as we all know we still haven't gotten everybody to
> implement or understand WIDEn-N. I guess what I'm trying to say is can you
> imagine the Digi operator that comes on board today with WIDEn-N and then
> tell them ok now you have to add Smart Pathing to your digi. While us
> experimenters and avid APRSers love playing with "How can we make this
> better" there are some digi owners that just want to put the thing up and
> leave it alone. The more often we come to them with another request to
> change the less likely (I believe) they will be to entertain notions of
> yet one more change. I guess it's kind of like the boy that cried wolf.
> Wouldn't it be better if a few people played with a new idea first before
> gets launched everywhere? Maybe I'm just missing something and that's not
> what's being proposed but it sure sounds like we might be headed from the
> idea stage to the real world without going through the testing phase.
> correct me if I'm miss reading these posts.
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at lists.tapr.org
More information about the aprssig