[aprssig] Best format for a Repeater Item (350 bug)

Jeff Dugas (Mobile) N5TEV at CompuServe.com
Thu Apr 25 16:05:02 CDT 2013


IMHO, the proper solution is for the 350 to be fixed.  I am not familiar with it, but is it a radio that can receive a new firmware flash?

Jeff
N5TEV


Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:

>> I'm all for putting the frequency in the list (object name),
>> but I sure don't see how it hurts to put it also in the comment
>
>I guess my only reservation is that it wastes 10 bytes, it creates a spec
>conflict with unknown results in radios that do follow the spec. For
>example, the FREQ-spec says that if there is a freq in the text in
>addition to the object name, that it is then an odd-split and the repeater
>output is the object name and the input is the frequency in the text.  If
>we make them the same then we cannot use this for anything but a simplex
>repeater since the spec calls for an automatic offset on 2m which will be
>canceled by having both freqs the same.
>
>So if it breaks all the other radios, just to preserve a minor function on
>the 350, Is my concern.
>
>I know we beat this to death a year or so ago, and found that the dual
>freq did work for the 350's but I do not remember if anyone tested to see
>if it broke the OFFSET TUNE function of the D710's and D72...
>
>> We just need to nail down a consistent, ... most broadly usable...
>format
>> and THEN start "encouraging" the correction, update, and rollout of the
>frequency objects.
>
>What we need is testing!
>I just spent some time and what I learned so far is:
>
>1) It cannot be an ITEM.  The D700's will not decode them.  It must be an
>object.
>
>More permutations and testing still needed.
>
>Bob, WB4aPR
>-------------------------------------------
>
>My conclusion is that all FREQ objects should be done right so that the
>packets appear correctly and serve their designed purpose on *all* radios
>including all kenwood's and all Yaesu's.  The only loss is that the QSY
>button on the FTM-350 will not work properly, though nothing prohibits the
>operator from manually tuning to that frequency.
>
>I prefer not to break the system to try to correct a bug in one radio that
>is only an inconvenience when all other value of this function works fine
>on all radios including this one.
>
>Bob, Wb4aPR
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: aprssig-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf
>Of Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)
>Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:39 AM
>To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [aprssig] Best format for a Repeater Item (350 bug)
>
>On 4/25/2013 8:20 AM, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>>> Bob!  You forgot the most important part that was recently discovered!
>>> The Yaesu FTM-350 REQUIRES the frequency at the beginning of the
>> comment!
>>
>> All of the advantages of the FREQ objects come from them appearing in
>> the STATION list on mobile radios.  It makes no sense to me to break
>> that intentended system design due to a minor bug in the 350.
>>
>> Putting the FREQ in the OBJECT name as designed appears just fine and as
>> intended in the 350 and the 350 can also sort them too.   So all of the
>> original functionality of this FREQ system also works on the 350. The
>> only thing the 350 won't do correctly is the QSY button.
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at tapr.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig


More information about the aprssig mailing list