[aprssig] APRS legality
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduWed Jan 28 23:07:04 UTC 2009
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
<all the continuing paragraphs and endless repetition snipped> > Bob,... I'd say over the last 12 years I've > transmitted somewhere over 100,000 packets > on HF and VHF APRS. Aside from a tiny handful > of messages (probably less than 0.001%), > none were directed at "one or more specific > stations". They were one-way transmission > to whoever happened to be listening, and for reception > into the APRS Internet System. Fine, that was your intent. Similarly, I have probably transmitted 100,000 or so packets too but the difference is that mine were all directed toward the local APRS network and the specific partitipating stations. None of mine (except the unattended remote telemetry station) were one-way transmissions. > Two one-way transmissions do not make a > two-way transmission! Agreed! Because they are both one-way transmissions! But my APRS transmissions are not one-way transmissions with no intended recepients as you claim. My APRS station comunications are two-way communications intended for a specific set of recepients who are all participating in a two-way (multi-way) net. > Right now you and I are having a two way > conversation. No matter how much it > seems to others we are just screaming at > each other, each message is a reaction to > the other person's prior message. If one > message from me was "today is wednesday", > and you sent "The sky is blue", are we > having a two way conversation? Of course > not, we are both sending random one-way thoughts. We hear that all the time on ham radio. Users are sharing their often random thoughts with the group and a tit-for-tat is not required by the FCC rules. In the example above, and in this email two-way exchange, we are talking apples and oranges, yet I say it IS a two-way communications because there are two or more of us talking at each other. There is no requirement in the FCC rules that requires comprehension or agreement by the other station to make it 2-way. > You send your position every 30 minutes, > I send my weather every 10 minutes, Joe > sends his tide reading every 15 minutes. > Is this a three-way conversation, or > three one-way transmissions. To me, the > answer is obvious. Yes, it is obvious to me too. It is a 2 or 3-way communications on the APRS network. If they are sending these on the APRS network using a transceiver that is also receivig this data, then it is a multi-way communication between/among that group. However, if the tide gage is connected to a transmitter only, then it is a remote telemetry device and it is sending a one-way transmission which we both agree is also legal under the FCC rules. > And yes, I know this isn't your "concept" > behind APRS (TM). Ah, but it is. It's a two-way, or if you want to be specific, it is a multi-way comunications network and of course it can include the clearlly defined one-way telemetry devices as well as all the other two-way exchanges. > This is however, the reality of 144.39. > Go ahead and encourage people to use > APRS more like your concept. Just please > do not say people do not have the legal > right, or the Bob-given right, to use the > way the majority use, and want to continue > to use, 144.39 and its associated APRS > (TM) tools. Ah, I don't think I ever said any of that. I welcome one-way WX/tracker/etc telemetry devices for the applications they are best at, but I also encourage every station with a transceiver and/or an operator present to use the two-way aspects of his APRS station to the advantage of all in his local net. This heated debate is from what appears to me to be your attempt to force your concept of one-way transmission on everyone else. And I disagree with your facts. I contend that the vast majority of APRS stations are two-way and that the remote transmitter-only one-way telemetry devices are in the tiny minority. In my area, right now, I see 241 stations on local RF in the DC/Baltimore area: - 56 are digi's (2-way) - 44 are objects (2-way) - 50 are home stns (2 way) - 18 are home WX (2-way) - 60 are D7/700/710 (2-way) - 2 are remote WX (1 way) - 4 are Mic-E's (1-way) - 3 are NMEA (1-way) - 4 are trackers (1 way) So lets make a deal. I won't try to call your one-way transmit only telemetry devices as two-way, if you won't try to force your definition of one-way on all the rest of APRS stations that are two-way participants in the network. Bob, Wb4APR
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
