[aprssig] Group tracking
Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)
ldeffenb at homeside.to
Mon Apr 30 20:15:40 EDT 2012
Did you really mean to recommend WIDE2-1,WIDE2-2 for a mobile path? Or
was that supposed to be WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 with proportional pathing enabled?
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
On 4/30/2012 6:47 PM, Bob Bruninga wrote:
>
> Simple answer!
>
> Proportional pathing for the caravan with WIDE2-1,WIDE2-2 path.
> Everyone hears everyone else at a one minute rate for up-to-date live
> situational awareness but most of your packets are direct and do not
> bother anyone in the area. Half of your packets may make it to a
> local digi, but only 1/4^th will bother the surrounding area. Same
> goes for hiking.
>
> Bob, WB4APR
>
> *From:*aprssig-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] *On
> Behalf Of *John Goerzen
> *Sent:* Monday, April 30, 2012 5:41 PM
> *To:* TAPR APRS Mailing List
> *Subject:* [aprssig] Group tracking
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I'd like to get some recommendations on beacon configuration for group
> tracking scenarios. The main scenarios I have in mind are:
>
> 1. A caravan of 2 or 3 vehicles traveling to a common destination.
> The trip could be 30 minutes or 15 hours, could involve a mix of
> highway speeds (75 MPH) and city speeds (20 MPH or less). The
> point of APRS tracking would be to give at least one vehicle the
> means to find the other if needed, due to getting separated in
> traffic, taking different exits, loss of cellphone communication,
> etc. The vehicles will usually, but conceivably not always, be
> within simplex range of each other (owing to lack of external
> antennas and high speeds in some cases).
> 2. Hikers in 2 groups in a large park/wilderness area. A similar
> goal as before - give at least one group the means to find the
> other assuming nothing but APRS beacons as communication. Here I
> would assume that the hikers will be within simplex range (say, a
> mile or two) of each other at 5W.
>
> One could also add other similar scenarios, such as coordinating
> search and rescue parties, tracking SKYWARN volunteers, etc.
>
> There are a few special things about these scenarios:
>
> 1. We may not usually care about getting frequent position updates.
> During the minutes / hours in which one party is not trying to
> locate the other, we don't care too much about getting frequent
> updates.
> 2. When one group is trying to locate the other, default position
> update timings will likely be way too long. For instance, 5
> minutes or even 2 minutes at 70MPH is a lot of miles and a lot of
> potential exits that may or may not have been taken. A lot of
> SmartBeaconing scenarios have 30 minutes between beacons at 20MPH,
> which is unreasonable for tracking someone in city traffic. (And,
> according to my reading, could actually be even longer at speeds
> between the low and high speed, oddly enough)
>
> One could conceivably use a TinyTrak AIO or similar device for the
> group being tracked, though in my particular case it will likely be a
> locked VX-8GR. Neither the TinyTrak nor the 8GR responds to APRS
> position query packets (?APRSP), so that is out. The TH-D72A does,
> but it is also larger and for various reasons is also the stronger
> tracker device.
>
> For the hiking scenario, we could conceivably use a 440 frequency
> since it is unlikely that a digipeater would be of any help at all.
> This puts less of an importance on restricting transmit rates. A lot
> of testing suggests that battery drain on APRS HTs is usually due to
> engaging the RX side, not the TX side, so I would not have battery
> concerns on a simple 1-minute interval.
>
> For the car travel, we would probably want to use WIDE1-1 (are there
> any digis that would answer to WIDE2-1 but not WIDE1-1?) to get a
> little help from nearby digis, due to the likelihood of greater
> separation and more challenges to RF signals getting out. It seems a
> bit annoying to have a 1-minute beacon going from a restaurant parking
> lot for an hour on 144.390, but perhaps it is not as bad as I am
> making it out to be. It seems that if I set the low speed on
> SmartBeaconing to, say, 5MPH to prevent this, and set the high rate to
> 2 minutes and the low rate to 5 minutes, it would lead to some very
> long intervals at, say 10MPH (70/10*2 is 14 minutes). An odd little
> gap in the SmartBeaconing design, that.
>
> What are suggestions to both meet the objectives and be friendly to
> other RF users?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
> KR0L
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20120430/bef4daf7/attachment.html>
More information about the aprssig
mailing list