[aprssig] Hop progression

[Jim Alles]

I think the best thing for me to do is to ask you to explain your
perspective?

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Jim Alles <kb3tbx at gmail.com> wrote:
> > That is not true in my part of the N.E. - there are enough digis and
> I-gates
> > that the first transmission stands a slight chance of hitting an I-gate
> > directly, and the first hop covers local information purposes and LOTS of
> > I-gates.
>
> You seem to be making the invalid assumption that the purpose of an
> APRS transmission is to get into APRS-IS.
>

No, I mentioned it, but my transmission and the first hop out of a
digipeater is RF, for local information purposes.  In fact, the only useful
purpose for doing more than two hops in a desolate area (midwest) would be
to get to an I-gate - it isn't local information anymore.  If you need to
reliably connect to someone that far away, set up packet again.
If I just wanted to get dots on a map, I wouldn't need my license, just a
cell phone.

>
> > The truth is that if your first transmitted packet isn't heard, adding
> hops
> > isn't going to change a thing.
>
> Sorry, but that's nonsense, especially if you actually care about RF
> operation.  It _might_ be true, in _your_ area, _if_ you only care
> about getting back to the internet.
>


Let me expand that - if your first transmitted packet isn't heard by a
digi..
Nonsense, no, -  RF reality.

Peace,

Jim A.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20110219/c495dcb7/attachment.html>