[aprssig] New n-N success in North Carolina

[Eric H. Christensen]

I don't know an answer for the dumb trackers out there.  I use a D700
and a D7 and change my path as I go.  I don't think there is a single
path out there that will work everywhere because everywhere is
different.  You can't go to the Midwest with the same path that you
would use in NC.  If you were running up and down I-95, then the
once-proposed 95LNKn-N would work with probably a RELAY in front of
it if you do venture off the I-95 corridor...  BUT, that won't work
now that work has ceased with that project.

Not being that familiar with the dumb trackers can't you reprogram
them with a laptop?  I know it would be hard to reprogram it every
100 miles...  Maybe use RELAY,WIDE?

Eric KF4OTN

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org 
> [mailto:aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org] On Behalf Of Robbie -
WA9INF
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 19:57
> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] New n-N success in North Carolina
> 
> 
> So Eric, what will it take for mobile travelers to use your 
> area if you 
> are abandoning WIDEn-N? One says use RELAY,WIDE2-2, Others say no
to 
> RELAY period and others say use RELAY,SSn-N, or LNKXXn-N
> 
> Do we have a way of knowing when we start out on our trips 
> where to park 
> and change our dumb tracker UNPROTO paths?
> 
> I got a bad feeling about all this.. The country is going to 
> become all 
> fragmented because of all the confusion with all this hip shooting.
> 
> Robbie
> 
> Eric H. Christensen wrote:
> 
> > See below...
> > 
> > 
> >>>>>ke4tzn at cox.net 2/11/05 11:44:40 AM >>>
> >>>
> >>>We have now changed over the the new SSn-n and
> >>>lnkn-n here in eastern NC. Since these changes I have
> >>>now been able to hit my local digi 90-95% of the time using 
> >>>only 5 watts! In the past it has taken 50 watts and only 
> >>>50-60% of my packets have been heard.
> >>
> >>Thank you for moving out on the New n-N Paradigm so
> >>quickly.  But as with many things that are new, we have already 
> >>learned an awful lot about how we can still improve things. 
>  And since 
> >>the first idea of LNKn-N and SSn-N came out, we have 
> learned thse new 
> >>issues:
> >>
> >>1) SSn-N is still a perfect way to go for most local ops
> >>    it remains a great feture of the New n-N Paradigm
> > 
> > 
> > Absolutely!
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >>3) We found a simpler way to TRAP large N hops without
> >>    haivng to drop WIDEn-N completely
> > 
> > 
> > This will not work.  Yes, you can trap SOME of the WIDEn-N 
> packets but 
> > that won't stop 4-4, etc.  PLUS, in NC we are putting 
> additional LANs 
> > up to support gating of weather bullitens and objects so 
> they don't go 
> > outside of the area. (We have someone on the Western part 
> of Virginia 
> > or NC that is sending out bulletins to a very WIDE area.) 
> So we don't 
> > have room to trap all these bad n-N packets.  By doing away with 
> > WIDEn-N, we have freed up our network from a lot of packets 
> that used 
> > to come in from all over.  John's assessment is accurate.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>4) LNKn-N will never work since it simply takes too much
> >>    coordination and wont be of any value unless all links
> >>    in the chain are good.    It has been abandoned
> > 
> > 
> > I disagree.  As you coordinate the SSn-N you coordinate the 
> LNKn-N. We 
> > ALREADY have THREE digipeaters up on the 95LNKn-N and that 
> was within 
> > a month.  Not a lot of work there...
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>What you have done is a great positive step.  But please
> >>re-visit the New n-N Paradigm site and prepare for one more 
> >>round of changes.  Basically, send out a bulletin reminding 
> >>everyone how much better SSn-N (or Wn-N) is than W,W or R,W.  
> >>Then you can turn back on the WIDEn-N but with the filters on 
> >>55,66,77 or what ever limit you want...
> > 
> > 
> > I think the next best thing is to eliminate the WIDE and TRACE.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>>This has been the best thing that has happened to APRS
> >>>to date. I hope we don't back track to our older ways.
> >>
> >>ANd thanks for trying it.  And dont be upset with this
> >>latest change.  We have learned a lot from the user
> >>feedback and it will make it even better...
> > 
> > 
> > I disagree.  Even letting WIDE4-4 through would bring in 
> many packets 
> > from hundreds of miles around and then we are back at square one.
> > 
> > Eric KF4OTN
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>de WB4APR, Bob
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > aprssig mailing list
> > aprssig at lists.tapr.org 
> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org 
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>