[aprssig] Cleaning up the Global APRS Satellite ground station network?- New Symbol

Steve Dimse steve at dimse.com
Mon Aug 7 22:30:11 EDT 2017

> On Aug 7, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:
> If we bgine using #J overlays for APRS-IS satelite ground stations, what conflicts will arise?
I can only repeat things I have said before about other proposals to identify function based on symbols.

1. Each station only gets one symbol. If a station has more than one function it has no choice but to not send one of the symbols, and it takes away the personalization option that has always been attractive to hams participating in APRS.

2. You will never get great compliance with anything that is user-configurable, especially if it involves station identity. Even if #1 were not a problem there will always be people that will not do it correctly. 

3. Even if 1 and 2 aren't a problem, you only get those who intend to be satellite gates, not those who actually meet equipment, performance, and configuration requirements.

It is easy to identify those people who function as satellite gateways using the path of packets. Creating a database from the actual data will catch those who actually function as satgates without needing any extra compliance from the operators. 

If you want more info on the station config then you ought to either use something in the comment or better, a user-defined packet, or user a registration system.

Finally, I've never counted the number of active satgates but I'd be surprised if it passed 50 on any given day, not the hundreds you claim in the AMSAT message. We certainly have hundreds on 144.39, but not on 145.825. And with the temporary demise of the ISS packet system, I'm sure the number has dwindled quickly as it has during other prolonged outages and it will take a while to rebuild when something comes back on 145.825. Better not to over-promise on behalf of APRS.

Steve K4HG

More information about the aprssig mailing list