[aprssig] PIC processor for APRS info for D-STAR mobiles?

[Ron McCoy]

Yes it does. Thank you.

To restate what I think I understand, by bridging APRS transmissions to 
D-STAR, the audio channel would be congested with data transmissions 
that, even though they did not break squelch on anyone's radio, would 
limit the audio transmissions the service was designed for.

Fair statement?



Pete Loveall AE5PL Lists wrote:
> Please read my "D-PRS> D-STAR and APRS Explained" post.  If you think in terms of what you are used to (analog voice repeaters and trying to do data on the same channel), then you will have a good understanding that the same issues exist with digital voice repeaters and trying to do dedicated data on the same channel.  While D-STAR doesn't have the "brap" of a TNC when doing data, it does transmit audio information when you are only sending data and the repeaters do generate additional information that generates, in essence, a courtesy tone.  That additional information is important for repeater users so it cannot be turned off.  This is the difference Rich was talking about: an analog controller could delay audio and prevent a pure data transmission from being retransmitted.  There is no equivalent in the D-STAR world since there is no pure data transmission.  It is always a voice transmission and those transmissions are always repeated by the repeater.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> 73,
>
> Pete Loveall AE5PL
> pete at ae5pl dot net
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ron McCoy
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 5:41 AM
>> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [aprssig] PIC processor for APRS info for D-STAR mobiles?
>>
>> Could you briefly outline the " significant detriments to the primary
>> use of the communications channel?" I think I got a glimmer from
>> another
>> poster but I'd like to hear your reasoning.
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>