[aprssig] Fill vs. wide?

[John Dvoracek]

You're preaching to the choir. These are all IGates primarily, and
they typically digipeat about 5% of the packets they hear, at least
when the internet connection is up.  However, they are located at
repeater sites with emergency power, and the e-types all say, what
happens when we lose the internet?  In that case, they can only
function as digipeaters, hence, my original question.

http://k5ctx.dstargateway.org:14500/ - for example (doesn't have much
history as I did a restart for a confg change)

73--John

-----Original Message-----
Re: [aprssig] Fill vs. wide?

Conservatively assess the _unmet_ VHF needs of fellow actual APRS users on
the air in the potential coverage area, and cooperatively work backward from
there to improve the VHF network.  Who truly needs (what) more VHF packets
on the channel we all must share?  When?  From where?  Why?

For those viewing our stuff on internet, coverage is more a matter of IGates
than VHF digis.

Conservative VHF user settings (of digipath and transmission interval) are
courteous VHF network settings.
73, Cap


> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: [aprssig] Fill vs. wide?
>
> I've searched and found no guidelines although such surely exist, but
> what's the rule of thumb for when a digipeater graduates from a fill
> digipeater to a wide-area digipeater?  Is there an antenna height
> about ground-level criteria?  I sysop digipeaters that vary from 90
> feet to 400 feet above ground.  There could be all sorts of other
> criteria I know, but, please, KISS mode reply!
>
> 73-John