[aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal

Mike Goldweber mike at mikegoldweber.name
Tue Jul 15 10:29:55 EDT 2014

Just a thought on this point.  My ARES group is getting up to speed on digital communications, but we are quickly hitting limitation when it comes time for supporting our served agencies.  For example, we've got software that lets us use a nice GUI for sending/receiving emails, and even some of the government forms.  This software converts forms into text, and the baud rates are fine.  Where we will run into difficulty is when a non-ham (ie someone who doesn't understand the tech, or its limitations), and expects us to send a word document loaded with photographs. 
We are looking at other options to get around these limitations, e.g. wireless mesh networks.  So, I think the TNCs are fine for some work, we should be open to new tech along with how APRS standards can utilize the new functionality.
Mike Goldweber
--------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal
From: "Keith VE7GDH" <ve7gdh at rac.ca>
Date: 7/15/14 10:06 am
To: "TAPR APRS Mailing List" <aprssig at tapr.org>

KA7O wrote...
 > Not simply because it's known - but more importantly from my
 > viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's no new investment
 > to make.
 APRS was built on using existing equipment. For many people, that is 
 important, but how long do we continue to use old technology? Another 5 
 years? 25? 100? What we have works for now, and does a surprisingly good 
 job considering the limitations. However, I suspect we won't be running 
 1200 bits per second with a maximum of 50-65 users within earshot and 
 having to fiddle with paths forever. Change will come. It's just a 
 matter of when.
 73 Keith VE7GDH
 aprssig mailing list
 aprssig at tapr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20140715/d452af5e/attachment.html>

More information about the aprssig mailing list