[aprssig] SATgates ? (again)

Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Tue Jan 26 10:44:16 EST 2016

Yep, that’s a problem.   So I guess we are going to need a special SATgate

No matter how we do it, it will need a list of satellite calls that gets
updated when new satellies are launched.

That’s all I am after is a dedicated black-box code that acts as these
special satgtes.

The main objective is the numerous other countries which do not have an
existing SATgate but do have a dedicated AMSAT/ARISS station for ISS
communications.  These operators are not necessarily packet or APRS or
internet savvy, but are dedicated to keeping their tracking stations on
ISS.  We want to be able to send them this SATgate code, they just hook up
to a TNC and radio or soundcard and turn it on.

This will probably be a SATgate in the one major city in the country and we
don’t want it to create a blackhole for the few other Satllite oeprators

Im not asking for all IGates to support this.  I only need one that is easy
to set up by non APRS folks.  Then it is the one we can write the system
and procedures around.  And get a working global APRS satellite network
that wors consistently everywhere.


*From:* Kenneth Finnegan [mailto:kennethfinnegan2007 at gmail.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:21 AM
*To:* John Wiseman; TAPR APRS Mailing List
*Cc:* Robert Bruninga
*Subject:* Re: [aprssig] SATgates ? (again)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:38 AM, John Wiseman via aprssig <aprssig at tapr.org
> wrote:

I've added a SATGate mode as described to the BPQ32 Igate code.

One consequence is that packets sent directly by the satellite, rather than
diigpeated through it, won't be Igated. Could this be an issue?

Yes. That's another big reason why so many of us are advocating against
this mode even being an option.

Kenneth Finnegan

John G8BPQ

From: aprssig [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
via aprssig
Sent: 24 January 2016 23:28
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
Subject: Re: [aprssig] SATgates ? (again)

I'm not trying to change the APRS-IS.  I'm trying to fix the satgate problem
by asking any author of IGate code to include a SATgate mode that will
ignore direct, undigipeated packets.  When any authors respond with the
feature, then we will have a SATgate we can recommend for people to use.
This is a SATgate only issue and it should not be included in terrestrial
operation.  Terrestrial APRS network has a different objective.
The people that we want to set up SATgates are Satellite folks first and in
far corners of the world and we want to eliminate this obscure problem in
that application by fixing it at hte SATgate..
Bob, WB4APR'

On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv at gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Robert Bruninga via aprssig
<aprssig at tapr.org> wrote:
>... What you're describing is trying to use the APRS-IS as a local RF
analysis tool.
No, I'm trying to make the APRS satellites work as a useful constellation
and to have their integration into the APRS-IS work in a consistent manner
all over the world.

It does - it treats your hypothetical "satgate" just like any other Igate.

I'm just trying to identify IGate code that has this SATgate mode so that we
can know what software to recommend for SATgate use.

There isn't any.  But that's OK, since there isn't a special version of
APRS-IS stripped of deduplication running in your hypothetical "satgate"
mode to connect them to.

This is exactly the same non-problem as using APRS-IS for RF propagation
analysis.  APRS-IS simply isn't designed for that, and the way it is
designed actively prevents its use in that manner.


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/20160126/3a15c0a3/attachment.html>

More information about the aprssig mailing list