[aprssig] New Writeup On HF APRS Posted To My Website

[Cap Pennell]

Listening on VHF, I don't mind the GATE if there are _no_ VHF digis
requested beyond it.  It's kind of nice to see the DX come and go, if you
can hear the GATE station direct on VHF (like the IGates can).
73, Cap

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aprssig-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] On
> Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
> Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 5:33 PM
> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List; Stephen H. Smith
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] New Writeup On HF APRS Posted To My Website
> 
> >> Given the large number of HF Igates
> >> around the world, one could almost
> >> argue against the need for [a path
> >> of GATE,WIDE2-1] in an HF beacon.
> >>
> > Not almost.    TOTALLY argue against......
> 
> Actually, I think I can support that.  In fact, lets make it happen.
> Lets change all docs to make such settings obsolete and make sure all
> docs only suggest NO HOPS, NO DIGIPEATS and NO GATES on HF.  The
> advantages are numerous:
> 
> 1) No digis - DOUBLES throughput
> 2) No path shortens packets by 14 bytes!
> 3) This improves reliability of 40 character lines by 20%!
> 4) No Gating to VHF minimizes QRM everywhere
> 5) IGates provide connectivity we didnt have in 1993
> 
> And HF stuff coming in from all over the world is NOT LOCAL and of
> interest on any VHF net.
> 
> Lets do it... Any objections?
> 
> Bob
> Wb4APR
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig