[aprssig] The East will Rise again! (at 9600?) VHF-YES!

[Robert Bruninga]

Bryan and Bill,
,
Wow, great thinking.  Does the KPC-9612 then transparenltly operate KA node
across both ports?
Then you are right, this is the way to go.  Now, which way...  Im still then
leaning for 2m for the long haul between nodes, and then users come in on
UHF because they are closer and can use beams on UHF?

Bob, WB4APR

-----Original Message-----
From: aprssig [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall via
aprssig
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 8:22 PM
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
Subject: Re: [aprssig] The East will Rise again! (at 9600?) VHF-YES!

>>  But we need more than hikers,
>> to get us access to some existing ham radio maintained sites.  We do
>> NOT want nodes to branch off down into the plains.  These nodes would
>> bog down the network.  No, the main backbone would be to support
>> emergency operations with beams that can point up to the mountains to
>> pass traffic.

> The backbone and users access ports should absolutely be on different
> bands/frequencies.
> 73-KY9K/Brian

What Brian said!!

If you do use the KPC-9612 you'll have a second 1200 baud port.  Hook that
to a UHF radio for user access.

I'd argue that the 'easy' technique of mixing node to node and user traffic
on the same node in the Legacy packet system was responsible for poor
performance and thus disenchantment and downfall of the whole system.

Bill
_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at tapr.org
http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig