[aprssig] 434 MHz tracking

Earl Needham needhame1 at plateautel.net
Sun Aug 5 19:11:30 CDT 2007

At 05:48 PM 8/5/2007, Andrew Rich wrote:
>I wonder if we are ever going to break the shackles of 1200 baud ?

         I seriously doubt it.  I suspect we'll all be tired of this 
style of data before we ever get close to going to anything faster.

         That being said, I would really, REALLY like to see APRS 
move to a higher frequency band at 19.2K or faster.

         Here's a little something thrown in for interest --

At 09:13 AM 12/9/2001, I wrote:
>At 10:03 AM 12/9/2001 -0500, Ryan Wilkins wrote:
>>My vote would be to set up a 9600 baud network on 70cm.
>         While I agree that we need a higher-speed network, and that 
> it will probably be on a higher frequency, I'm not at all sure that 
> 9600 on 70 cm is going to do what we need.  I think we may need a 
> MUCH higher speed, however 9600 may well be an interim measure.
>         Consider -- there are a few people who put 4000 or more 
> stations in their stations.txt (I used to be one!), and that will 
> totally hog a frequency at 1200, and as long as this type of 
> transmission lasts, I would expect that it will do the same at 
> 9600, just for a little less time.  Perhaps we won't consider this 
> type of usage, but what I'm trying to point out is the ease with 
> which we can dominate a particular frequency.
>         I'm of the opinion that, ten years from now, we'll either 
> have an incredible speed on 902 or higher, or else APRS will be 
> sitting about where packet on 145.01 is today.  I can only hope I'm 
> wrong, BTW...
>         7 3
>         Earl

         It's been almost six years and I'm not sure we've even 
considered a higher speed OR frequency.  If I knew how to make it 
happen, I would, but as long as everybody seems to be happy on 1200 
bps, I doubt we ever change anything.  We're seeing the effects, too 
-- remember a few years ago when you could use APRS over wide areas, 
say 300 miles across?  Today, we're almost totally limited to 2 or 3 
hops because of congestion.  I think 19.2K or faster would have 
helped every bit as much as shorter paths, but why settle for 
19.2k?  let's figure out how to take old modems and use them on the 
air for 56K.

         7 3

KD5XB -- Earl Needham
Clovis, New Mexico DM84jk

More information about the aprssig mailing list