OpenBCM V1.07b12 (Linux)

Packet Radio Mailbox

DB0FHN

[JN59NK Nuernberg]

 Login: GUEST





  
ZL3AI  > APRDIG   16.07.04 06:42l 538 Lines 20862 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3591-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jul 13, 1/1
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 040716/0430Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:27914 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3591-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To  : APRDIG@WW

TAPR APRS Special Interest Group Digest for Tuesday, July 13, 2004.

1. Re: does anyone see me??
2. Re: does anyone see me??
3. Re: Super Tiny DIgipeater
4. Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
5. Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
6. Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
7. Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
8. Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
9. Does anyone have Evermore GM305 . pdf  or pin-outs?
10. an EXTREMELY BASIC question time...
11. Re: RE 9612+
12. Re: Remote Ignition Relay Trigger
13. Re: Wanted : PIC code for NMEA bit bashing
14. Re: Wanted : PIC code for NMEA bit bashing

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: does anyone see me??
From: "Cap Pennell" <cap@cruzio.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:25:33 -0700
X-Message-Number: 1

We see you.  Bob, you apparently digi via RELAY,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE!
http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/raw.cgi?call=K8YS
http://map.findu.com/K8YS
It appears you have more than a dozen other nearby APRS stations within 10
miles of your home.
http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/near.cgi?call=K8YS
It looks like using a digipath of WIDE,WIDE would probably do as well.
Resist the temptation to use longer digipaths and transmit more often, if
you can.  Good neighbors use conservative VHF settings to help leave airtime
available for everybody else.  More than 2 digi hops doesn't usually help
much.
73, Cap KE6AFE

>-----Original Message-----
>
>Bob K8YS wrote 12/07/2004 5:20:25 PM
>
>>I hear myself transmit and I hear a nearby digi transmit...
>>
>>I have not been on APRS in some time, my unproto is RELAY and I digi via
>>WIDE,WIDE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: does anyone see me??
From: Rick Green <rtg@aapsc.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:48:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 2

This is sort of a 'ditto' post.  I am also an APRS newbie, trying to make
this think work.
  At the Dayton Hamvention, I bought one of Byon's Pockettracker kits,
took it home, assembled it and aligned it.  By all local tests I can run,
it appears to be working fine, yet I've never seen a single packet show up
on findu.com, despite my driving around a wide area of southern Michigan
(Ypsilanti to Ionia, MI) with it, using a roof-mounted rubber duck
antenna.
  I've got xastir running on my home computer, but I don't currently have
an outside 2M antenna at home, so I don't have a local TNC to capture
packets from even my own yard.  I did set one up on the bench a month ago
to verify that the pockettracker was actually transmitting.
  After reading this thread, I reconfigured xastir so that it would
'transmit' my position to the server, then ran a 'near' query on fundu.com
as someone suggested.  It came up with 40 stations within a 41.5mi radius,
but I see no indication which of these may be digis, with what aliases
implemented, and/or igates.
  WHere do I go from here?  How can I 'decode' the 'station info' that
xastir presents, or is available on findu.com, to determine what unproto
path (especially that most-difficult first hop!) will allow my little
pipsqueak signal to be tracked?

-- 
Rick Green, N8BJX

P.S. ANybody know who moderates the xastir mailing list?  Several
subscribe requests seem to be ignored over there...

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
 temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                  -Benjamin Franklin

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Super Tiny DIgipeater
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:54:24 -0400
X-Message-Number: 3

John,
Wow thanks!
Ill put this satelltie developer in touch with your web page...

Bob

>>>John Hansen <hansen@fredonia.edu> 7/12/04 10:03:30 PM >>>
Yes, see www.tnc-x.com 
Currently there are about a half dozen cubesat developers that have 
purchased TNC-X's.  I believe the one at the University of Hawaii is 
scheduled to launch in the Fall.  I have, on occasion, done some 
customization of the hardware and firmware for cubesat projects.  If there
are some mods in particular you need to have made for cubesats, feel free
to contact me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:13:21 -0400
X-Message-Number: 4

One more concept for the ALT-CHANNEL INPUT concept is to choose a MYCALL
for the digi that is unique so that FINDU and other systems can keep them
distinct.  I recommend something like 99ANAP for our Annapolis channel
which we hope will be on 144.99.  Or it could be 01ANAP if we wind up on
145.01.  If we had two, then we could use SSID-s to distinguish them.  But
we think only one per city should give most of the intended advantages so
we are not out to seed these things everywhere...

Hopefully ours might make it up today...

I have written up all the details on this ALT-INPUT-CHANNEL concept that is
linked on my usual FIXING 144.39 page:

http://www.ew.usna.edu/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html 

de Wb4APR, Bob

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net@ruraltel.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:28:58 -0500
X-Message-Number: 5

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>

: >And wll the home stations be transmiting "in the blind"
: >on a freq it is not listening to?
:
: Yes, that is the network design to GAIN an order of
: magnitude  better reliability for everyone in that area.
: It is just like the COMMON practice of using PL on
: 2 meter voice repeaters.  Every user of such a repeater
: is transmitting in the blind on the input channel...
:
: de Wb4APR, Bob

That is a confusing analogy Bob.  It is a reasonable assumption that if the
repeater is not transmitting the input frequency is not in use.  This would
be the same if the input required a PL or not, I don't know of any one that
listens to the input frequency before using a repeater, nor have I ever seen
that recommended.

Your original post on this topic has been long gone from here and if you
have it posted on your web pages I can't find it, but as I remember your
proposal, I don't understand how the discussion of  "in the blind" got
started.  As I recall and understood your proposal  a fixed station
utilizing the alternate frequency would operate like any other packet
station and would not transmit unless the frequency is unused.  The
equipment at the digipeater site would monitor the alternate frequency and
buffer those packets for retransmission on 144.39 whenever the activity on
..39 would allow it.  In the event my recollection is anywhere close, I'm at
a loss at what point the fixed stations would be "home stations be
transmitting "in the blind" on a freq it is not listening to?"--73
Doug, N0LKK
dougy@ruraltel.net

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:37:10 -0400
X-Message-Number: 6

>>>dougy@ruraltel.net@ruraltel.net 7/13/04 12:28:58 PM >>>
: Yes, that is the network design to GAIN an order of
: magnitude  better reliability for everyone in that area.
: It is just like the COMMON practice of using PL/CTCSS 
: on 2 meter voice repeaters.  Every user of such a repeater
: is transmitting in the blind on the input channel...
: de Wb4APR, Bob

>That is a confusing analogy Bob.  It is a reasonable 
>assumption that if the repeater is not transmitting the 
>input frequency is not in use. 

I would argue that that is -not- a reasonable assumption at all in areas
where PL is used to differentiate between different co-channel users.  Then
the channel is frequently in use, but the repeater is only responding to
its own PL only.

>This would be the same if the input required a PL or not.

I disagree.  The reason for the PL is to prevent the repeater from coming
up on OTHER signals on the input.  Otherwise why would they have PL on it?

>I don't know of any one that listens to the input frequency 
>before using a repeater, nor have I ever seen that 
>recommended.

Yes, and that is exactly my point.  There is nothing illegal or wrong about
operating a repeater that way and similarly there is nothing wrong with
operating a DIGI that way either.   The above example was only raised
because one individual said it would be questionable to not listen first. I
disagree.  There is no need to listen on the input first if the digi is
coordinated via the local  coordinated body to have an input on that
frequency... and if the design of the system INCLUDES the consideration
that occassional (3%) collisions may occur.

>Your original post on this topic has been long gone from 
>here and if you have it posted on your web pages I 
>can't find it.

See http://www.ew.usna.edu/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html

>but as I remember your proposal, I don't understand how 
>the discussion of  "in the blind" got started. 

It was one of the red hearing opposition comments that implied it would be
wrong to transmit on an alternate channel input without listening first. To
which I responed that it is common practice to do so and gave the
example...

>As I recall and understood your proposal  a fixed station
>utilizing the alternate frequency would operate like any 
>other packet station and would not transmit unless the 
>frequency is unused.  

No, he transmits on the digi's alternate input and he receives on 144.39

>The equipment at the digipeater site would monitor the 
>alternate frequency and buffer those packets for 
>retransmission on 144.39 whenever the activity on
>.39 would allow it.  

Yes, this is correct.

>In the event my recollection is anywhere close, I'm at
>a loss at what point the fixed stations would be "home 
>stations be transmitting "in the blind" on a freq it is not 
>listening to?"--73

I hope the above clarifies it...

Bob

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net@ruraltel.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:37:14 -0500
X-Message-Number: 7

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>

: I hope the above clarifies it...
:
: Bob

    Yea pretty Much Bob thanks.  The PL analogy is to address a rehash of
the horrors of tinytrack, It will be filtered out of my mind from now on.
In the event that WX is a stand alone station there would be no need for
them to monitor .39 and would be free to monitor the alternate frequency and
wouldn't be guilty of blind transmissions.  My guess is that the majority of
WX stations are coupled with home stations where the user will want to
monitor 39 primarily would be transmitting blindly.  Perhaps I have missed
it, but if this is a problem for some shouldn't they be looking for
solutions so fixed station could monitor 39 and the alternate?  Could the
solution as be as simple as this?;  The TNC and transceiver work on the
alternate frequency to avoid transmitting blindly by the fixed station.  A
second receiver monitors 39 and it's audio is mixed with the audio from the
transceiver to the TNCs input audio.  Would this allow the home users aprs
application monitor aprs traffic and avoid transmitting blindly?  Keyboard
activity would be funky if packets are tied up in the alternate's buffer at
the digi,  however if conditions are so crowded that the alternate frequency
is employed, keyboard comms. wouldn't be worth a xxxx anyway.--73
Doug, N0LKK
dougy@ruraltel.net

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: APRS 144.39 dual channel upgrade
From: "Richard Amirault" <ramirault@erols.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:07:24 -0400
X-Message-Number: 8

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Bruninga"

>I would argue that that is -not- a reasonable assumption
>at all in areas where PL is used to differentiate between
>different co-channel users.  Then the channel is
>frequently in use, but the repeater is only responding
>to its own PL only.

And in such cases those other signals (non or different PL) are *not* trying
to get into your local repeater .. they are trying to get into *their*
repeater (which is usually a lot closer to them than your machine)  If you
transmit over such a signal on the channel you are *not* causing
interference at all, since the other party has a stronger signal into his
repeater than you .. and you have a stronger signal into your repeater than
his.

>>This would be the same if the input required a PL or not.
>
>I disagree.  The reason for the PL is to prevent the repeater
>from coming up on OTHER signals on the input.  Otherwise
>why would they have PL on it?

PL is also used to prevent non-repeater signals (intermod and the like) from
triggering the repeater.

>>I don't know of any one that listens to the input frequency
>>before using a repeater, nor have I ever seen that
>>recommended.
>
>Yes, and that is exactly my point.  There is nothing illegal
>or wrong about operating a repeater that way and
>similarly there is nothing wrong with operating a DIGI that
>way either.
(snip)

Sorry, I don't agree. (boy, Bob, every once and a while you sure come up
with some strange ideas;-)

Richard Amirault                                N1JDU                Boston,
MA, USA
www.erols.com/ramirault          "Go Fly A Kite"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Does anyone have Evermore GM305 . pdf  or pin-outs?
From: "TJ Hvasta" <skygodtj@cableaz.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:49:52
X-Message-Number: 9

Hello all,

I purchased two Evermore mouse-type GPS receiver modules, GM-305 & -308, 
from DeLuo.com but they didnt come with any documentation.  Does anyone 
have any docs for these receivers?  I found one place that has a .pdf file, 
but it's a bad link and I couldn't decode the correct one.
Even something on the pin-outs for power/data...

Any help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks!

TJ, NS2E
Mesa, AZ

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: an EXTREMELY BASIC question time...
From: "JBCrafts" <jbcraft@adelphia.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 21:42:41 -0400
X-Message-Number: 10

I am going on a road trip in a week, I would like to build up a tracker. The
last time I had a tracker, I used a dual port TNC from Paccomm (ARE THEY
STILL IN BUSINESS? THEY NEVER ANSWER EMAILS!!!), this time I am just going
to resurrect an old TNC.

EXACTLY what do I need to do to get this thing on the air? IE paths, BText
etc...

Do I parse a sentence from the GPS? which one?

The TNC is an OLD OLD Tempo with a built in receive printer. How do I get
the TNC to send on the GPS data?

Bob K8YS

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: RE 9612+
From: Bill Herrmann <bherrman@spro.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:01:49 -0600
X-Message-Number: 11

>----- MSG form Kantronics -----------------
>Kantronics developed the expansion boards for the KPC-9612+ in 1998.  In
>the following year, we sold 7 boards.  In 2000, the boards were
>discontinued.

Yikes! I wonder how many they sold in 1999?

Wes - I have a KPC9612+ with the optional 1200bps board. I didn't know it 
was that rare! If you have any questions on what it can/will do let me 
know. I bought it off eBay hoping to use it for a mic-e/digipeater addition 
to a remote site. It doesn't do what we hoped there but it works well at my 
house.

There were two limitations that killed it at the remote site:

1. No support for the APRS telemetry. (It has the analog ports but you can 
only read the data if you connect.) The digi in question is at a 100% 
solar-powered site and sends battery and solar panel voltage info using 
APRS telemetry.

2. It will gate from one port to another but doesn't support WideN for the 
gating. (You could gate packets that were via wide,wideN in my testing but 
not wideN alone.)

I'm not sure how many versions of firmware they had for it, but the 
firmware is specific to the add-on board. Mine has 8.3.

As near as I can tell the upgrade consisted of:
The add-on port board (available in both 1200 and 9600 bps models till 
discontinued)
A new front and back plate
A new cover
A replacement prom with the firmware to support the additional port.

The unit has the same footprint as a stock 9612+ but is about twice as 
tall. The 3rd port is a daughter board mounted on top of the original 
board, so the status LEDs and the radio connector are above the other ports 
LEDs/connectors.

Let me know if you want any other info. Obviously, there must be a few 
other units out there but finding one could be a challenge. I did later see 
one with two 9600 ports on eBay, so they may be there occasionally.

Bill 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Remote Ignition Relay Trigger
From: Bill Herrmann <bherrman@spro.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:12:51 -0600
X-Message-Number: 12

At 01:14 PM 7/5/2004 +0000, Phil Pacier, AD6NH wrote:
>Hi all, and thanks in advance for your help.  I would like to build a relay
>that will power up my APRS tracker package when the key is turned on in the
>vehicle.  I'm sure there's a way to do this, and it has probably been
>discussed, but I can't find it in the search.  Any ideas?  Thanks!

Sorry for the late chime-in here.

Several high-tech solutions have been mentioned.
The low-tech solution of using an ignition switched wire (or connector at 
the fuse block) was also mentioned.

An intermediate tech solution would be to use a circuit based on a zener 
diode set to turn on a relay when the vehicle is actually producing power. 
(I've not built this yet.)

Somebody mentioned having a difficult time getting at power in a newer 
vehicle. Great tip that I got from another ham (who I can't give credit to 
as I've forgotten who it was!) - Look for a power seat connection if any 
model of your vehicle had a power seat even if yours doesn't. Our minivan 
had the wiring even though we didn't have the power seat. It's fused at 30A 
and always on.....

Bill 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Wanted : PIC code for NMEA bit bashing
From: "Brian  Riley (maillist)" <n1bq_list@wulfden.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 22:25:58 -0400
X-Message-Number: 13

On 7/12/04 9:59 PM, "Mike Yetsko" <myetsko@insydesw.com> wrote:

>>Is anyone willing to give up some code for decoding NMEA 4800 data stream
>>using bit bash method ? I am using the MAX232 and USART method for a GPS
>>display. I would rather keep the chip count down to one.
>> 
>>http://www.tech-software.net/gpsiilcd.htm
>> 
>>Cheer Andy VK4TEC
>> 
>You mean bit-banging UART code?  At any baud rate?
> 
>I've done it for all kinds of processors.  Not that I would have direct fit,
>but if you want general algorithms...

This makes no sense! Chip count and bit-banging versus UART are not related
.... Regardless of whether you are using bit banging or the internal USART
you will need a level shifter of some kind, a chip, a transistor, etc.

BBR

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Wanted : PIC code for NMEA bit bashing
From: "Mike Yetsko" <myetsko@insydesw.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 22:45:24 -0400
X-Message-Number: 14

>On 7/12/04 9:59 PM, "Mike Yetsko" <myetsko@insydesw.com> wrote:
>
>>>Is anyone willing to give up some code for decoding NMEA 4800 data stream
>>>using bit bash method ? I am using the MAX232 and USART method for a GPS
>>>display. I would rather keep the chip count down to one.
>>>
>>>http://www.tech-software.net/gpsiilcd.htm
>>>
>>>Cheer Andy VK4TEC
>>>
>>You mean bit-banging UART code?  At any baud rate?
>>
>>I've done it for all kinds of processors.  Not that I would have direct fit,
>>but if you want general algorithms...
>
> This makes no sense! Chip count and bit-banging versus UART are not related
>... Regardless of whether you are using bit banging or the internal USART
>you will need a level shifter of some kind, a chip, a transistor, etc.
>
>BBR

Obviously you've never 'clamped' a line on receive (inverted state) or used
an open collector output with a diode and cap to 'switch' an input to
output to get RS-232 levels without a driver...  And yes, parts count is
not '1', but the 'chip' count can be.

But that's not what I was responding to.  He said "code for decoding ...
.... data stream using bit bash method "

I thought he asked one question (for code snippets) and just expressed
a desire for the rest of the project (the count).

---

END OF DIGEST



Read previous mail | Read next mail


 29.11.2020 05:28:35lGo back Go up