<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-9">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>SDR handheld ?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>SDR payloads ?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>- Andrew - </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=ta1df.huseyin@gmail.com href="mailto:ta1df.huseyin@gmail.com">Hüseyin
ODABAŞ, TA1DF</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=aprssig@tapr.org
href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">TAPR APRS Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 20, 2013 6:08
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [aprssig] 1200 vs 9600 baud
(was: Tracker3 9600 baud balloon tracker beta offer)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P dir=ltr>Hi to all</P>
<P dir=ltr>A Beagle Bone Black + AIS based 9k6 modem - low power UHF cape
combo would be a good combination as new year gift :-)</P>
<P dir=ltr>Best 73!</P>
<P dir=ltr>Huseyin TA1DF</P>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>20 Ara 2013 08:13 tarihinde "Scott Miller" <<A
href="mailto:scott@opentrac.org">scott@opentrac.org</A>> yazdı:<BR
type="attribution">
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">I
want to see more 9600 baud APRS on 70cm - we don't get a lot of consumer RF
stuff down in the VHF bands and it's never going to be as cheap as the
low-power UHF stuff that's churned out in massive quantities for consumer
electronics.<BR><BR>But it shouldn't be just a faster APRS network. It
needs to be a lot smarter - self-organizing and adaptive, not relying on
centralized control but also not every man for himself ALOHA
networking.<BR><BR>I'm hoping to play around with that some myself, but
right now I've got two more pallets of weather stations to finish packing...
somehow running a full-time APRS business is leaving me less time to play
with APRS.<BR><BR>Scott<BR>N1VG<BR><BR>On 12/19/2013 4:12 PM, Ted11
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Scott's
balloon tracker has gotten me thinking again about a
lingering<BR>question, 1200 vs 9600 baud for APRS. I think I
understand this:<BR><BR>1. 9600 lets you send more data per time
interval.<BR>2. 9600 requires tighter radio integration (can't just
plug into the<BR>microphone jack).<BR>3. 9600 seems to work best
(only?) on UHF.<BR><BR>Beyond those rather rudimentary constraints, I'm
not sure how to decide to<BR>use 1200 or 9600. All my APRS stuff so
far is done at 1200, but I'm<BR>interested in what advantages 9600 might
have. So how would you answer the<BR>question, "When should I use
9600 baud for APRS and when should I use
1200<BR>baud?"<BR><BR>Thanks.<BR><BR>Ted<BR>K5KZ<BR><BR>______________________________<U></U>_________________<BR>aprssig
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org"
target=_blank>aprssig@tapr.org</A><BR><A
href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
target=_blank>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/<U></U>listinfo/aprssig</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>______________________________<U></U>_________________<BR>aprssig
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org"
target=_blank>aprssig@tapr.org</A><BR><A
href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
target=_blank>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/<U></U>listinfo/aprssig</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>aprssig mailing
list<BR>aprssig@tapr.org<BR>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>