<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph, li.m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph, div.m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph
{mso-style-name:m_-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Re 9600 and UHF,</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I have slowly begun to start using local UHF repeaters (and meeting newer voices) for just the reason you mention (VHF desense). We have DOZENS of UHF repeaters in our area (Maryland/DC)).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Just a note. 9600 baud APRS gains only about a factor of 2, not the expected factor of 8, because of the fixed overhead of TXD and other T/R delays. Combined with the significantly less range of UHF for the same class antennas, there is almost no incentive to operate APRS style bursts on UHF at 9600 baud. That is why it has never taken off. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">But actually moving TRAFFIC through a fixed long linear 9600 baud conventional packet links is something we should have been doing since 1998 when every APRS radio by Kenwood put dual band 1200/9600 baud TNCs in the hands of almost every operator. But no one uses this powerful 9600 baud we have had for 19 years. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I want to build a 9600 baud East coast packet network.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">See: <a href="http://aprs.org/ec9600net.html">http://aprs.org/ec9600net.html</a></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> Bob, WB4APR</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> aprssig [mailto:<a href="mailto:aprssig-bounces@tapr.org">aprssig-bounces@tapr.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Bob Mueller<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:26 PM<br><b>To:</b> TAPR APRS Mailing List<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [aprssig] APRS UHF freq?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><div><p class="MsoNormal">I wish a national UHF channel would get established for APRS. I think it would be great to run 9600 baud on UHF. I would really like to build a digi that cross band digis from 1200 VHF to 9600 UHF. Both directions. It seems that everyone is drawn to 2m FM for phone. Whether it's club nets, ARES nets, or Public Service nets. They seem to always land on 2m. I think it'd be great to have a 70cm APRS option. That way FM phone on 2m does not de-sense APRS operations. Or full duplex dual banders such as the TM-D710G can continue to receive packets on the other band, while transmitting FM phone. Or transmit packets while listening to a net on FM phone.</p><div><p class="MsoNormal"> </p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal">I'm not calling for every digi to get replaced with a cross band digi. But it would be nice to have a national 70cm frequency established. So a 70cm option can potentially be added to some of the digi's that are out there. I think it would be very useful in certain cases.</p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"> </p></div></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all"></p><div><div><div><div><div><p>--... ...--<br><span style="font-size:9.5pt">Bob Mueller<br>K8MD<br></span><a href="mailto:bob@funautical.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9.5pt">bob@funautical.com</span></a></p></div></div></div></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Robert Bruninga <<a href="mailto:bruninga@usna.edu" target="_blank">bruninga@usna.edu</a>> wrote:</p><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The UHF freq for APRS comes up every now and then. Here is what I know.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">1)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">We use 445.925 on UHF for both APRS voice channel and APRS UHF for events. </span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">2)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">Using operator-to-operator voice here avoids interference with 2m APRS.</span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">3)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">Also for some events, operating APRS combined with Voice Alert has value.</span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">4)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">I don’t think we want any dedicated permanent UHF links on 445.925</span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">5)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">445.925 is NOT an APRS frequency in southern California due to other uses</span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">6)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">There is no national UHF or 9600 channel that I know of. </span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d">7)</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><span style="color:#1f497d">The only permanent APRS UHF net I know of is in the Pacific Northwest on 440.800 (or 440.875?) at 9600 baud.</span></p><p class="m-4944578901218173750msolistparagraph" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1f497d">Bob, WB4APR</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> </p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>_______________________________________________<br>aprssig mailing list<br><a href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a><br><a href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig" target="_blank">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a></p></blockquote></div><p class="MsoNormal"> </p></div></div></body></html>