What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

WIDE1-1 vs. WIDE2-1

Davepar

Well Known Member
So a guy shows up at my door this afternoon out of the blue and gives me a mini tutorial on APRS. He says I've been blasting my position all over Western Washington whenever I go flying. His first suggestion was to put my email address on qrz.com so people can get a hold of me without going to my home.

His second suggestion was to use just a path of WIDE2-1. When I set up my Micro-Trak, I just copied Pete's settings from the original thread. Apparently the WIDE1-1 in there makes all the mountain top digipeaters as well as home-based digipeaters repeat my position. He said using WIDE2-1 would hit all the mountain-top digipeaters, which would be sufficient when you're up at altitude.

And his third suggestion was to get a better transmitter. He said the Tiny/Micro-Trak units stomp on other people's transmissions. I guess Allen will have to comment on that.

I'm going to try making that change next weekend and see if I still get pretty good coverage.

Dave
 
Interesting

Hi Dave,

I wonder if this is just a mountain area thing. I was told not to use "relay" but thought wide n-n was ok.

I do know there are hams that do not like the Microtrak becuse it transmits without checking the frequency first. This seems to be a style thing.

Let us know what you find out.
 
So a guy shows up at my door this afternoon out of the blue and gives me a mini tutorial on APRS. He says I've been blasting my position all over Western Washington whenever I go flying. His first suggestion was to put my email address on qrz.com so people can get a hold of me without going to my home.

His second suggestion was to use just a path of WIDE2-1. Apparently the WIDE1-1 in there makes all the mountain top digipeaters as well as home-based digipeaters repeat my position. He said using WIDE2-1 would hit all the mountain-top digipeaters, which would be sufficient when you're up at altitude.

And his third suggestion was to get a better transmitter. He said the Tiny/Micro-Trak units stomp on other people's transmissions. I guess Allen will have to comment on that.

I'm going to try making that change next weekend and see if I still get pretty good coverage.

Dave

Wow.....don't know if I would have the nerve to walk up to a stranger's door and "tell" them how they are messing up the ham bands.......here in the South that is a good way to get a face-full of buckshot. :eek:

Dave, hopefully Allen will weigh in on this matter but as one who has already been slammed by an old-timer ham about how we are destroying the APRS system I can relate to your experience. I totally disagree with the individual's opinion who got on my case since most of his argument was emotional rather than rational. Hopefully the individual who took the time to track you down was sincere about wanting to assist you with your APRS experience.

Let me preface my remarks with this observation. After perusing some ham forums I have come to the realization that many hams are a very surly bunch. There is open hostility, and I mean hostility, on the part of some hams toward those of us who snuck into ham-dom without earning that right by learning Morse code. To these old-timers, the "no-coders" are just a bunch of riff-raff that have no right participating in "their" hobby. (Sorta like LSA pilots aren't real pilots????? ;) )

I don't know if this attitude had any role to play in the visit you enjoyed, but we have to recognize its presence. The fact that we have the audacity as undeserving license holders to operate a tracker from an airplane is just cause for these Keepers of the Faith to straighten us out.

Having said that, I am very open to ways we can be good citizens of the APRS community. If changing our path to WIDE2-1 will provide us the coverage we need, then I will make the change. The insistence on WIDE2-1 for airborne trackers is not universally accepted but does seem to be what the hams in your area consider good practice:

http://www.nwaprs.info/mobilesettings.htm

Perhaps with mountain top digis WIDE2-1 will work well in your area. It remains to be seen whether or not it works well for us flatlanders. The problem is we have no way to monitor realtime how well our packets are making it to the network. Consequently we must use configurations that have the best possible chance of providing good service in whatever environment our planes are flown. One flight can carry us over mountains and wide open spaces in the course of a couple hours. Which settings do we use, the "mountain" config or the "flatland" config? This is a situation the ground-bound APRS users don't have to deal with and possibly haven't considered. I intend to use a configuration that works in the widest possible range of environments because a crippled tracker is worse than no tracker at all.

In regard to the "problem" with the Byonics trackers, that matter has been discussed previously. The only practical way for an airborne tracker to operate is to transmit in the blind as do our trackers. If your tracker waited for a clear frequency before transmitting, since it can hear every tracker within 500 miles, we would most likely never have a chance to send a packet. Even if our unit found an opening in which to transmit, it would butt heads with any other nearby airborne tracker that was doing the same.

The ground-bound APRS'ers are just going to have to live with our blind trackers. We need to use sensible beacon intervals (we are), smartbeaconing (we are), and brief, concise packets (we are).

Until airborne trackers are deemed illegal, we are entitled to use the trackers in our aircraft in keeping with FCC regulations and common sense. I get the sense most hams are intrigued with our airborne trackers and delight in the expansion of the realm. But there are a few vocal malcontents as previously mentioned. I found it interesting the owner of aprs.fi that we all use has discovered us and posted on his blog some very nice comments about airplane trackers:

http://oh7lzb.blogspot.com/2008/03/trackers-in-airplanes.html

One more point. If we were broadcasting packets 24/7 I can see where there would be cause for concern about frequency congestion. But consider how many hours each week you are actually using the APRS network. Our usage is a fraction of the total net load. No doubt reasonable hams recognize this fact and will happily invite us to be partners in the APRS system. The ham population is thinning and graying just as the pilot universe, and reasonable hams will recognize that all new members of the service need to be welcomed instead of chastised.
 
Last edited:
Just a few comments:

After perusing some ham forums I have come to the realization that many hams are a very surly bunch. There is open hostility, and I mean hostility, on the part of some hams toward those of us who snuck into ham-dom without earning that right by learning Morse code. To these old-timers, the "no-coders" are just a bunch of riff-raff that have no right participating in "their" hobby.

It is true that there are hams that have that attitude, but I don't think it's reflective of the community as a whole. Heck most of those old timers couldn't even spell APRS:). I would say that the majority of hams would welcome new licensees regardless of their interests or qualifications and, as Sam mentioned, most APRS users would welcome airborne APRS stations.

The amateur service is a very valuable resource that is managed by a bunch of volunteers. All of the APRS gateways you guys are using are financed, built, and maintained by volunteers. Frequency coordination is handled by volunteers, testing for licensees is handled by volunteers. Hams provide a valuable public service and have been called upon in virtually every natural disaster in recent history. Yes they are a diverse bunch, but I wouldn't characterize them as a surly bunch.

If someone came to my door and asked that I change my path or beacon interval, I'd get involved with the local organization (most communities have a local club www.arrl.org ) and do what I could to appease them. After all I'm using their gateways and I have no more right to the frequency than they do. Does this mean that one man's opinion sets policy for the entire country? NO; but I'd say if an organization asks you to do something, it's probably a good idea.

As for transmitting in the blind:

It is probably a necessity for airborne APRS, but depending on your settings it could border on intentional interference (which the FCC takes a very dim view of). I'm personally not using APRS in the air yet, but I plan to use a longer beacon interval of 2-5 minutes with smart beaconing. The smart beaconing will take care of the turns, and the longer interval will probably do wonders for relations with the neighbors. I'm also planning on running low (<1W) power levels. One of the rules of the amateur service is to use as little power as necessary for reliable communication. Trial and error will determine how much I'll need but based on other's experience on this forum 300mW seems to be doing the trick.

As far as the path statement:

Wide 1-1 replaced RELAY. The RELAY station was the home station that picked up local packets and relayed them to the distant digi. For aircraft, unless you're out in the middle of nowhere, you probably don't need it. It would probably be safest to just use 2-1 unless experience shows 1-1 is really needed.

Consequently we must use configurations that have the best possible chance of providing good service in whatever environment our planes are flown.

Sam, I respectfully disagree with your use of "must". The fact is our planes fly just fine without trackers. Are they nice? Sure. What will it hurt if you don't get all of your beacons into the system? We're not relying on it, are we? The fact is that a lot of people have spent a lot of time and money building a system, and if someone tells me I'm messing it up, I'll pull the plug.


As far as being "entitled" to something, a ham that just received his ticket is just as entitled as a ham that's been doing it for 50 years. However, in most all cases involving interference, the FCC has taken the stance that existing users and users that have coordinated their operations through volunteer frequency coordinators take priority.

Bottom line, let's be good stewards and avoid giving the RV community a black eye.

My .02,

Paige
 
Sam, I respectfully disagree with your use of "must". The fact is our planes fly just fine without trackers. Are they nice? Sure. What will it hurt if you don't get all of your beacons into the system? We're not relying on it, are we?

Paige

Actually APRS offers what may be the best SAR asset on the market now. ELTs are close to worthless. Spot does not transmit frequently enough for RVs. PLBs may be good but don't offer the track feature of Spot and APRS.

According to this site: http://www.nwaprs.info/mobilesettings.htm

"If it flies: WIDE2-1, once every minute or two minutes."

Having typed that, I don't understand the issue at this point. Back to reading.
 
Last edited:
I guess I'm not communicating my point very well. We're relying on the kindness of strangers to build a ground based tracking network as part of their hobby. The location of the nodes is not controlled by any one organization. The coverage is pretty good, but certainly not perfect. They've been operating this network for a number of years. It was designed to track objects on the ground. If someone who played a part in creating this network tells me that I'm doing something that is disturbing it, I'll quit.

Similarly I'll try to be as good a neighbor as possible. If I'm just traveling in a straight line, I don't need to transmit my position every 30 seconds. Yes we're covering a lot of ground, but if I'm not maneuvering, who cares (unless you're using it for SAR)? If I do maneuver, I will rely on smart beaconing to report my position more often.

While APRS is certainly another tool in the SAR puzzle, it isn't designed for that. There isn't even a guarantee that you will be within its coverage if you need it. If there is truly a need for a better SAR system, we should probably implement ADS-B. Rather than look a gift horse in the mouth, I'll rely on trusted procedures that have been established for commercial, military, and GA traffic. File a flight plan, use flight following, etc...

I'm not saying don't use APRS to enhance safety; I'm saying don't abuse the system day to day because you want the info available "just in case". [I'll leave the definition of abuse up to the organizations that built and maintain the network]. If you truly think you need APRS for SAR, then maybe we should write some software for the trackers that would enable a switch to transmit an emergency beacon at very short intervals with as high a power as possible to as many stations as possible. (I know the emergency beacon capability exists, but I don't know if it changes the interval, and I certainly haven't seen anything on the power level or path options). Yes this would require some action on the part of the pilot, but if I don't realize that I'm about to impact the terrain, then the likelihood of my survival is pretty low IMHO.



Paige
 
Paige, you must not fly where I do. First off flight plans are close to worthless. I file 00V to KPGA. What route? Or I change my path to sightsee. Then they have to comb thousands of square miles to find me. Can you say Steve Fossett?

Then you suggest that ADS-B is a potential solution. Got to tell you that this shows how many people are uninformed (probably misled) about ADS-B. That is not your fault. Much of that is due to the hype promulgated by the FAA and AOPA and others. Then most people did not read and comprehend the ADS-B Out NPRM.

First it may cost you up to $17,000 to install it.

Then there is no projected improvement in coverage over the current radar system (I asked the FAA about it). So where I need radar/ADS-B coverage it does not exist and there are no concrete plans to fill the gaps.

Where I fly I sometimes don't have flight following coverage even as high as I fly. Fly low like some do and coverage diminishes mucho more. So I will do everything I can to kill an ADS-B Out mandate on GA.

If ONE person complaining about RV use of APRS shuts it down then perhaps there are other issues. If we can coexist...fine. Provide specifics on what can be done. Wide 2-1? I don't understand what that means vs Wide 1-1.

The fact that APRS may not have an emergency mode like an ELT or PLB does not diminish the usefulness of it. Then there is the secondary mode in some units that may be usable for emergency use. Can't say for sure.

I have to register my PLB. That is good. Why can't we also register our APRS track with SAR assets? Or at the least, someone who knows about us can provide that info if we go missing.

In conclusion, I am new to this and may be just an uninformed on important info as others are on ADS-B.
 
Last edited:
config change

Got a gap in the schedule today, nice weather, and a lunch invite at MSL, so I'm on the way to the airport. I'm going to change the tracker config to WIDE2-1 and see how it works for the lunch flight. You can watch if you wish, should be departing DCU between 11:30-11:45 CST:

http://aprs.fi/?call=N399SB&mt=m&z=10&timerange=3600

I have an iGate here at home that usually snags a bunch of my packets when the plane is within 75 miles but I'm going to leave the iGate disabled so we can get a better sense of how the digis are picking up the WIDE2-1 path.

We'll talk this afternoon...... :)
 
APRS stuff

I just came back from the Hamvention in Dayton, Ohio. I saw a guy with a Van's RV tee-shirt, and talked to a couple of RV builders. You guys are everywhere!

As far as courtesy, I would be reluctant to accept advice about courtesy from someone who shows up unannounced on your door....That being said, he may have a few good points ( Although I personally would have set he hounds on him!)

First, send only the power you need. Second, use a Path that will give you performance on the ground and in the air. When we CAP people come looking for you, we would like to know where to look. The ham-taliban guy that showed up at your door may not understand the full implications of APRS for aircraft. Third, Don't send too frequently. Its not polite to tie up the network. Including your e-mail in the comments field is a good idea, and I recommend it.

Now, this gent takes the position that you should get a "better" transmitter. The implication being that you should use a transmitter that monitors the frequency before transmitting. At altitude, this will essentially prevent you from sending any transmissions, ever, as Paige pointed out. ( oh yes, if he shows up will you please tell him I said "screw you you pinko left handed *******" , but try to say it in a loving, and non-judgmental way.....)

The idea that you will wait for a "clear" time to transmit is silly. At altitude, you will receive signals from (potentially) thousands of miles away. These signals are not heard by ground stations or other mountaintop digipeaters, but will keep you from sending. You would not for instance, ever receive the signal of a transmitter that is on the other side of a mountaing from you, so these in no way to know if they are transmitting in an attempt to contact the same digipeater you are.

In any given area, waiting to transmit until the air is clear will result in everyone transmitting nearly simultaneously, or nearly so. This ham needs to think it through.

In an ideal world, I would ask each of you to set up your own I-Gate, and we can choose our own airborne frequency, free of other hams. Then, switch to the standard frequency when on the ground or flying below terrain.

Many old timer hams are crusty, disfunctional human beings. This is true of the general population, so I will leave it up to you to decide if they are over-represented in the ham community.

Allen
VHS
 
I just came back from the Hamvention in Dayton, Ohio.
XXX snip XXX

In an ideal world, I would ask each of you to set up your own I-Gate, and we can choose our own airborne frequency, free of other hams. Then, switch to the standard frequency when on the ground or flying below terrain.

XXX snip XXX
Allen
VHS
1. What's a good reference for setting up an I-Gate?
2. Switching frequencies would require a frequency agile transmitter and a mode switch?
 
I'm going to change the tracker config to WIDE2-1 and see how it works for the lunch flight. You can watch if you wish, should be departing DCU between 11:30-11:45 CST:

http://aprs.fi/?call=N399SB&mt=m&z=10&timerange=3600

... I'm going to leave the iGate disabled so we can get a better sense of how the digis are picking up the WIDE2-1 path.

Sam,

WIDE2-1 mode seemed to work fine. I tracked you from liftoff to (almost) touchdown -- although the last "hit" was about a half mile north of the MSL airport, headed northwest. Maybe you were entering downwind...

BTW, I just took delivery of a MicroTrak 8000FA -- looking forward to setting it up! Thanks to you and everyone for your continued great inputs to this topic and thread! I'm learning a lot!

73 de W9VMO.
 
Last edited:
Return from lunch

Got a gap in the schedule today, nice weather, and a lunch invite at MSL, so I'm on the way to the airport. I'm going to change the tracker config to WIDE2-1 and see how it works for the lunch flight. You can watch if you wish, should be departing DCU between 11:30-11:45 CST:

http://aprs.fi/?call=N399SB&mt=m&z=10&timerange=3600

WOW Sam, still able to transmit on the taxiway at 591 FT- 9MPH
This is so cool, where is the reciever at? On the airfield? :D

2008-05-19 18:54:40z
15 MPH 236? alt 594 ft
KJ4CKK
 
Sam,

WIDE2-1 mode seemed to work fine. I tracked you from liftoff to (almost) touchdown -- although the last "hit" was about a half mile north of the MSL airport, headed northwest. Maybe you were entering downwind...

BTW, I just took delivery of a MicroTrak 8000FA -- looking forward to setting it up! Thanks to you and everyone for your continued great inputs to this topic and thread! I'm learning a lot!

73 de W9VMO.

Thanks Buck! Yep, WIDE2-1 looked very solid. I never have gotten hits on the ground at MSL, guess it's just the nature of the coverage at that airport.

There is an iGate a few miles southeast of DCU that snagged most of the packets so still don't know how this path would work out in the boonies but it looks promising. It should eliminate some repeater hops and help me do my part to limit digi congestion. I'll continue to fly this config for a while to make sure it works well for my installation.

WOW Sam, still able to transmit on the taxiway at 591 FT- 9MPH
This is so cool, where is the reciever at? On the airfield? :D

2008-05-19 18:54:40z
15 MPH 236° alt 594 ft
KJ4CKK

The packets transmitted from the runway were received by an iGate 15 miles SE of the airport.

Well, first experiment with WIDE2-1 was good and we'll see how it goes from here. Guess everyone with a tracker needs to use whatever works best in their situation. I might still consider going back to WIDE1-1, WIDE2-1 for a major cross-country trip....but WIDE2-1 may be fine for flying in my local area.
 
Last edited:
No Receiver

... The implication being that you should use a transmitter that monitors the frequency before transmitting. At altitude, this will essentially prevent you from sending any transmissions, ever, as Paige pointed out. ...

That's what I thought at first but my experience makes me disagree. I have about five years flying my Long-EZ on APRS using an Icom IC706 (a complete transceiver -- transmitter and receiver), running about 5 watts with SmartBeaconing set for once a minute. Occasionally it waits a few seconds to transmit but generally my packets are spaced about 60 seconds apart. The system works!

For example, here's a 40-minute flight from the Phoenix area to Tucson:
http://www.mail2600.com/cgi-bin/tra...=2008-02-23 14:17:56&stop=2008-02-23 22:17:56
or http://tinyurl.com/3vdakb

40 packets, no obvious "holes" in the reception. The low-altitude transmissions (i.e. while on final or taxiing) are not much different from ground stations with respect to coverage, interference, etc. so it only makes sense that I follow the same procedures. And at altitude, my tracker delays a small but random time between hearing the channel go clear and transmitting so others doing the same stand a fair chance. It's not a big deal if an occasional high-altitude packet is delayed or even lost. But it might be a big deal if I gummed up the network for a few minutes while I flew near a big city.

Of course, YMMV when flying at 13,500 over central Nevada or metropolitan Seattle (I've done both with good results) but listening before transmitting (a more than 100 year-old ham tradition) is still a good idea.

73,
Joe, K7JD
http://www.mail2600.com/cgi-bin/everyone.cgi
 
Whats the cost of your setup Joe, I'd be more than happy to play nice with others if not too much more expensive? How do you set up Smartbeaconing?

If a little expense on our part will improve compatibility with other users then I'm all for it. Hard to tell how big a problem it is for ground based APRS users?
 
Whats the cost of your setup Joe

Too much! :) But the IC-706 can be used for other things too: a second receiver for checking AWOS, yakking on 2m FM with hams when airborne (occasionally), or listening to FM music or TV sound when camped out with the airplane (Arlington!). Besides, it was just gathering dust since I removed it from my car quite a few years ago.

Last year I built a second tracker (to use as a "loaner") that's more cost-effective. I found an old Radio Shack 2m FM handheld radio at a hamfest for $35. A TT3 from byonics.com set me back another $35 and I used a GPS-mouse and 7 AH SLA battery I had on hand. Both the GPS and battery could be eliminated by using aircraft systems. My Van's RV toolbox project (cut in half) made a nice case. Pictures on request.

I think the whole thing could be duplicated for around $100 but it involved a bit of thought and labor. I'm not sure if I were to to do again today I wouldn't buy an off-the-shelf solution. But I do like having a receiver in the setup.

Just to be clear: I don't assert that transmit-without-listening is a Totally Bad Thing; I simply maintain it's a less-than-optimum solution.

How do you set up Smartbeaconing?

That's a whole 'nother topic and I'm out of time. But I'll say this: my Byonics TT3 supports it -- just check the appropriate boxes in the configuration utility. Not all APRS setups do support it.

73,
Joe, K7JD
http://www.mail2600.com/webcam.htm (not getting any work done 'cause I'm on the computer :)
 
equipment cost

here is the cost of the system I put together...
I purchased a new Yaesu hand held for $119.00 with an mic/speaker adapter cable (CT91) for 10.95.
A TT3plus (assembled) and gps from byonics for $112.00.
A few DB9 connectors for .75 ea.
I made up all my own interface cables from the drawings on Byonics web site.
I haven't had a chance to fly with it yet but did test it driving home from the airport. Here is a link.

http://aprs.fi/?call=ke7tuc&mt=m&z=11&timerange=21600

I wired the audio input to the TT3 so as to transmit only when the freq was clear and I programed the tt3 to wide2-1 only.

The hand held was laying on the front seat and and using only the rubber ducky antenna it came with.

So for a little less than 250.00 I have a system and a hand held I can use for other tasks
 
Last edited:
Does the new system being developed by Byonics also wait for a clear frequency before transmitting?

Is it even good to do so while flying...especially high like I do?
 
Finally checking back in. Thanks for all the good info.

I should mention that the guy that showed up on my doorstep was very nice about the whole thing. He said he tried searching for me on the internet. Guess he used "David" instead of "Dave", as I'm the number one result for my name on Google. Even beating out a famous musician. :)

I haven't tried WIDE2-1 yet, but I expect it will work very well. The mountain-top digipeaters around here seem to pick up lots of the packets anyway. According to my visitor, my packets can be seen all the way down in Portland as it hops the local mountain-top digipeaters. I certainly didn't mean for that to happen.

I'm guessing most of us don't care how often our packets are repeated over RF, as long as they get onto the internet. Is every digipeater internet connected? If not, it would be nice to have something like WIDE2-G that says repeat it until it gets on the net via a gateway.
 
I haven't tried WIDE2-1 yet, but I expect it will work very well. The mountain-top digipeaters around here seem to pick up lots of the packets anyway. According to my visitor, my packets can be seen all the way down in Portland as it hops the local mountain-top digipeaters. I certainly didn't mean for that to happen.

I'm not sure using just WIDE2-1 will make a huge difference in how far the mountain-top digis transmit our packets. Leaving out WIDE1-1 just keeps the low-power fill-in digis (often home stations) from repeating our packets. Once the big repeaters pick up our packet, things are out of our hands. An airborne tracker creates a scenario with its great range that ground-based trackers don't have to deal with.

I'm guessing most of us don't care how often our packets are repeated over RF, as long as they get onto the internet. Is every digipeater internet connected? If not, it would be nice to have something like WIDE2-G that says repeat it until it gets on the net via a gateway.

Every big digi is not an iGate, in fact most aren't since the big remote digis won't have access to a broadband internet connection. Many iGates, such as mine, are not repeaters at all, just receiving stations, often in homes since that is more likely to offer internet access.

I'm not sure there is much we can do beyond using WIDE2-1 to control how far our packets get hopped. WIDE2-1 limits our packet to just one hop by the big repeaters (no hops by the little fill-in guys since they only respond to WIDE1-1), but since the big boys are doing the hopping, your packet might still end up in Portland. :)

Here is a page that offers some background on APRS paths. It is a little dated but a careful read will provide insight into how this WIDEn-N stuff impacts our trackers and the APRS newwork. Be sure you jump down to the "New Paradigm" section to see how digis are currently handled:

http://wa8lmf.net/DigiPaths/index.htm

I continue to be impressed (and grateful) to the very clever folks who thunk up all this APRS stuff.
 
Last edited:
I suppose a real solution would be a system that listens for clear freq and if not available after a programmed period, transmits anyway. Play nice when possible and then assure usefulness to our needs. Maybe to next product out of Byonics could support that?
 
I have been reading the discussions in this thread and learned a lot. At the same time I have been working with my local/area hams to find the best setting for my tracker (micro-trak 300). I used to set my path as WIDE1-1, WIDE2-1 and fast rate at 60 seconds. Although I live in a sparsely served area (southern Ohio), I noticed a lot of conflicting packets (speed >500 km, etc.) and some bad coordinates. At 3,000' my packets are picked up from >100 miles away by several i-gates and digis. My new settings are WIDE2-1, fast rate at 90 seconds, and "only send valid". I did cut out a lot of home digis, but still get my packets in through distance i-gates. On my weekend trip to Indianapolis, I noticed that there were no conflict and bad packets! I am happy that I used minimum resource yet still accomplished my goal. I fully understand that each of us have different missions in mind and that will require different settings. For me, the primary purpose of the tracker is to allow my family and friends know where I am. Longer packet interval is perfectly fine.

(The contents of the following link will change soon after 5/27/2008).
http://aprs.fi/?c=raw&call=KD8IIR
 
I've found the same thing. Wide1-1 and higher packet rates just lead to more packet discards. I am keeping Wide1-1, Wide2-1 as a secondary configuration for low altitude operations, and I will continue to experiment with low altitude coverage.

V
 
Here's an update on APRS performance.

I replaced my temporary mounting of the MicroTrak 300 with counterpoise, and hard-mounted it to my seat back brace (right behind my right ear). The antenna is bent slightly to clear the canopy, and the whole shebang is well grounded.

Todays performance test was two runs, one at 1500' and the other at 2500' feet.

Both had similar performance, and were much better than my first runs to the same geographic area.

See http://aprs.fi/?call=va7vrl&mt=m&z=11&timerange=3600 (choose May 28 and 6 hours if you need to).

Compared to the May 22 run to the same area (east of my home airport), the performance was much better, with few discarded packets.

I will publish photos of the whole setup soon, so that you can see the install.

Vern
 
I have been following APRS for about a year now and I am just about ready to take the plunge. I have read just about everything I can find on the internet about it and I think I understand some of it. I agree with Allen's suggestion. It seems to me that we need to pick a freq for airborne operations and support it with our own i-gate network. I am willing to commit to putting in a i-gate in my area.
 
I have been following APRS for about a year now and I am just about ready to take the plunge. I have read just about everything I can find on the internet about it and I think I understand some of it. I agree with Allen's suggestion. It seems to me that we need to pick a freq for airborne operations and support it with our own i-gate network. I am willing to commit to putting in a i-gate in my area.

It would be helpful if you posted your name so that we know who we are dealing with. It sounds like you do not have an amateur radio service license-- that's a good first step.

A discreet frequency would defeat the purpose of APRS-- using the digipeater/igate infrastructure that's in place to track our positions. The solution to having too much traffic on one frequency is to only use as much transmit power as required. For me, 300 mW seems to work fine.

APRS (and for that matter the 2m band) uses frequency modulation. That allows multiple transmitters to talk at the same time (within reason) and for the digipeater's receiver to lock on to the strongest receive signal. Thus, with low power transmitters and a network of digipeaters, we can have a lot of stations in use at once.
 
Just another note in favor of just using WIDE2-1.

I recently changed my config (KI6GII-1) to remove the WIDE1-1 at the head of the path and reception still seems very good, without lots of home stations rebroadcasting my packets.

It also seems to have elimininated most of the duplicate 'too many packet updates in <5 secs' problems.

Unless one finds a reason for using WIDE1-1, I'd say we should all be good citizens and use WIDE2-1.

;-)
 
Back
Top