[aprssig] WXBOT -- weather forecast via APRS Message
steve at dimse.com
Tue Feb 2 20:51:50 CST 2016
> On Feb 2, 2016, at 8:34 PM, Greg Troxel via aprssig <aprssig at tapr.org> wrote:
> Steve Noskowicz via aprssig <aprssig at tapr.org> writes:
>> My personal opinion is that the CWOP stations are just clutter on the
>> map when watching, or looking for/at hams. This is especially true
>> when looking at the nearest stations list.
findU provides the option, compare
(and see the sad state of APRS in the Florida Keys)
> This is more of a comment about display systems, but it has echoes of
> the SATGATE discussion.
> Basically, direct injection into APRS-IS is not ham radio.
I would most VIOLENTLY object. If direct injection is not ham radio, then the APRS IS itself is not ham radio. Even if you choose not to accept the fact that creating it earned me one of ham radio's highest awards (Technical Excellence from the Dayton Hamvention) as proof it is ham radio, it simply has never been true than anything that does not involve RF is not "Ham Radio". If it were we would not have ham radio magazines, books, T-shirts, clubs, the ARRL, and much more. When I go to a ham club meeting I'm not putting anything on the air, but you can't tell me that isn't ham radio! And I'll be damned if I let you tell me ANYTHING about the APRS-IS is not ham radio. Amateur radio encompasses far more than radio waves.
> I would
> like to see data of what's over the air. Someday I'll actually hook up
> a radio to do that. Having CWOP stations (with xWnnnn or callsign)
> appear when sent via Internet can be useful if you want to know weather,
> and don't care that the weather data path is not survivable.
The CWOP network is separate from the ham radio APRS Internet System, something necessitated by the unexpected success of CWOP. The purpose of CWOP was never to get data onto APRS screens, we were leveraging the existing infrastructure to get more data to the NWS. findU and aprs.fi bring them together for display by default, but that is two separate decisions by two separate people serving their internet users (by your definition not ham radio so why should you care anyway?)
> 1) the APRS community should discourage direct-to-internet for weather
> and repeaters, at least considering it vastly second class
> 2) APRS-IS display programs should have easy filters to omit
> direct-to-internet objects, particularly wx and rptr. At least at for
> aprs.fi this seems hard. (I know i could run xastir and get a feed and
> add features - I'm talking about trying to change the culture.)
Maybe you should understand the culture first!
> 3) Again, dup detection is doing what it should, but it's causing the
> system to have bad properties, which is undetected brittleness.
> Perhaps all direct-to-internet messages should be delayed 100s or
> something, to allow any over-the-air to catch up, and to provide an
> incentive to transmit.
You do not understand the APRS philosophy. The entire system, even before I got involved in 1994, was designed to disseminate data. I'm sure if Bob could have figured a way to kludge in carrier pigeons he would have done so. APRS is about the information, not about the paths. There is no brittleness caused by dup removal, other than to paths, which are NOT what APRS is about. Yes, if we can pile on one more kludge to help in a specific use (not to filter internet injection but directly heard RF packets) of satellite and ISS IGates we will, but that has nothing to do with any brittleness or anything not being ham radio!
More information about the aprssig