[aprssig] APRS UHF freq?
w2ev at yahoo.com
Wed Jan 25 05:48:43 CST 2017
Indeed. The fact that a single frequency was chosen and that everyone moved is astounding. Compare the in-fighting that occurs when attempting to do the same with repeater coordination (especially on 6 meters) and one quickly realizes that it was nothing short of a miracle.
The move was driven by strong-willed people with power and influence in the community.
The move wasn't "perfect".
The frequency chosen was less-than-optimal (too close to the narrow-band sub-band) resulting in loss of direct participation by stations on hilltops, however that crowd now uses the remaining APRS network as third-party observers (http://aprs.mountainlake.k12.mn.us/) In fact, as I write this, 2 meters is wicked open in the SE USA.
However the move was "functional" and a positive testimony to those involved.
Parroting Steve, there is nothing stopping you from establishing the 70cm frequency that you desire...other than your will to do so. Don't expect others to do it for you because you think that it is a good idea. There is no "central governing body" to legislate from high upon Mt. Olympus. ;-)
Do research to become informed. Learn about "Line A" and similar geographical restrictions. Compare 70cm coverage to 2 meter coverage and be sure it meets the goal. Etc. Etc. None of this happened over night on 2 meters but with a strong will, time and influence you can lead the charge for 70 cm as you build a widespread coalition of support.
Best regards,Ev, W2EV
From: Steve Dimse <steve at dimse.com>
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig at tapr.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [aprssig] APRS UHF freq?
> On Jan 24, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Bob Mueller <bob at funautical.com> wrote:
> I wish a national UHF channel would get established for APRS.
Many people don't understand how incredibly unique and unlikely it is to have a single North American VHF frequency for APRS. It only happened because of a unique set of occurrences (exponential grow of APRS, a need for 145.8xx for worldwide ISS frequency, abandonment of attempt for a worldwide satellite band at 144.3-144.5 (happened in new world but not the old), the bravery of an AMSAT guy (Frank Bauer KA3HDO) to enter the lion's den of DCC to ask US APRS users to QSY, the work of a handful of people to organize and argue, the big three US ham groups (TAPR, AMSAT, AND ARRL) to work together in support, and the work a number of other people who devoted significant effort and funds to make it happen). It was, IMNSHO, the greatest cooperation that ever happened in ham radio and is vastly under-appreciated. 144.39 would have been enough of a reward to APRS, but we also got the nearly continuous ISS digipeater because of out QSY.
The result was great, but those of us that lived through that time know it was a one-shot deal!
> I think it would be great to run 9600 baud on UHF. I would really like to build a digi that cross band digis from 1200 VHF to 9600 UHF. Both directions.
So who is stopping you? A single North American VHF frequency is great for travelers who do not need to worry about QSY. UHF is great for things that are unique to an area, and a different frequency isn't a big problem for use by locals. The more local stuff you move off 144.39 the better!
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at tapr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the aprssig