Date   

Re: Old TNC's

Robert Bruninga
 

> Progress would mean moving to newer hardware, hardware that would remove the limits of 1200 baud...
 
Interestingly, going to 9600 baud only gains about a factor of 2 due to TX delays.
And all credit card transactions at point-of-sale terminals are still done at 300 baud!  It works.  Bob

I'd like to see how to improve the ability to just chat with another APRS user.  Voice alert works very well.  But hardly used.
bob


On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 6:41 PM James Ewen <ve6srv@...> wrote:
“but such is progress...“

You are of course being disingenuous here, right?

APRS is a protocol stacked on top of 1980’s hardware, using chewing gum and baling wire. 

Bob’s baby has squeezed a lot of life out of 40 year old equipment, there’s no denying that, but to think this is progress... 

I guess the automobile industry in Cuba is also making great progress as well. 

I love APRS, it is probably my favourite part of amateur radio, but is anyone here interested in investing in actually making progress? Progress would mean moving to newer hardware, hardware that would remove the limits of 1200 baud, probably something with an SDR base, and a whole new way of defining the protocols we use. Something designed from the ground up, not something that uses clever tricks to make old hardware work in a new way. 

We are kind of stuck in a rut today because there’s so much old hardware out there that we don’t want to throw out. But that old hardware handcuffs us to 1200 baud. 

I’m not going to be the one to lead the charge, but there are some really smart cookies out there that are building some cutting edge hardware that might be a base for the next big thing to take over for APRS. For that to succeed, we need to be willing to let the old hardware go, and embrace new technologies. 

It’s up to all of us to be willing to help the next big thing become that big thing. 

James
VE6SRV 

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 3:38 PM Greg D <ko6th.greg@...> wrote:
Yep.  MFJ-1278T in use here.  Seems a waste to run it in KISS-1200 mode, given it's huge mailbox and added 2400bps modem, but such is progress...

Greg  KO6TH


Brian Webster via groups.io wrote:

They work great for APRS, any program that needs a kiss TNC. I still run my daily. The only time it’s not ideal is when you need the TNC on a node site that needs special firmware in the eprom. Only a few TNC’s that are TAPR 2 clones (paccomm, MFJ 1270 series) are suitable for those chips. Normal packet users can use just about any type of TNC. The PK88 uses the same command set as a TNC2.

 

Brian N2KGC

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob & Jane
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 4:03 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] Old TNC's

 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?


--
James
VE6SRV


Re: Old TNC's

Greg D
 

Hi James,

So, only partly.  The modes I was referring to were "traditional" packet radio, not APRS.  APRS was certainly crafted without regards to the OSI model's 7 layer Cake, but in spite of that it's held up remarkably well and still serves a useful purpose.

On the other hand, the evolution of the Packet BBS network largely stalled.  There are still a few mailboxes on the air within reach of my home station, but they are hardly swamped.  The 2400 bps modem that I have was never widely adopted (I may have the only one left), and the jump to 9600 bps seems to have been the victim of a combination of regulatory bandwidth limitations and the widespread adoption of the Internet's  NNTP servers.  There are a few 9600 networks around, but not many, at least not around here.

I would argue that both developments - the success of APRS and the relegation of other packet modes to a niche - are as they should be.  It's about meeting a need, and being flexible to evolve as that need evolves, not about architecture for architecture's sake.  I think that having "old TNCs" still in productive service in parallel with Raspberry Pi's and Direwolf is a testament that the Ham community got something right.  I have both running here in the shack.  The subject MFJ TNC is hooked to my "home server" (a Linux PC that's always on) as an APRSIS32 APRS iGate, and a Raspberry Pi with Direwolf that is cabled to the main shack radios for the other packet stuff (Winlink, mostly), along with the Joe Taylor HF modes. 

The Pi and shack radios are things I can run from battery backup power, when all else has failed or been turned off (I'm in "Public Safety Power Shutoff territory here), for remote email and such.  When not doing so, I use it to check into a UI Packet net every Sunday.  Why not?  People still use Morse Code for much the same reasons.

Greg  KO6TH


Such is progress.

James Ewen wrote:

“but such is progress...“

You are of course being disingenuous here, right?

APRS is a protocol stacked on top of 1980’s hardware, using chewing gum and baling wire. 

Bob’s baby has squeezed a lot of life out of 40 year old equipment, there’s no denying that, but to think this is progress... 

I guess the automobile industry in Cuba is also making great progress as well. 

I love APRS, it is probably my favourite part of amateur radio, but is anyone here interested in investing in actually making progress? Progress would mean moving to newer hardware, hardware that would remove the limits of 1200 baud, probably something with an SDR base, and a whole new way of defining the protocols we use. Something designed from the ground up, not something that uses clever tricks to make old hardware work in a new way. 

We are kind of stuck in a rut today because there’s so much old hardware out there that we don’t want to throw out. But that old hardware handcuffs us to 1200 baud. 

I’m not going to be the one to lead the charge, but there are some really smart cookies out there that are building some cutting edge hardware that might be a base for the next big thing to take over for APRS. For that to succeed, we need to be willing to let the old hardware go, and embrace new technologies. 

It’s up to all of us to be willing to help the next big thing become that big thing. 

James
VE6SRV 

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 3:38 PM Greg D <ko6th.greg@...> wrote:
Yep.  MFJ-1278T in use here.  Seems a waste to run it in KISS-1200 mode, given it's huge mailbox and added 2400bps modem, but such is progress...

Greg  KO6TH


Brian Webster via groups.io wrote:

They work great for APRS, any program that needs a kiss TNC. I still run my daily. The only time it’s not ideal is when you need the TNC on a node site that needs special firmware in the eprom. Only a few TNC’s that are TAPR 2 clones (paccomm, MFJ 1270 series) are suitable for those chips. Normal packet users can use just about any type of TNC. The PK88 uses the same command set as a TNC2.

 

Brian N2KGC

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob & Jane
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 4:03 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] Old TNC's

 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?


--
James
VE6SRV


Re: Old TNC's

James Ewen
 

“but such is progress...“

You are of course being disingenuous here, right?

APRS is a protocol stacked on top of 1980’s hardware, using chewing gum and baling wire. 

Bob’s baby has squeezed a lot of life out of 40 year old equipment, there’s no denying that, but to think this is progress... 

I guess the automobile industry in Cuba is also making great progress as well. 

I love APRS, it is probably my favourite part of amateur radio, but is anyone here interested in investing in actually making progress? Progress would mean moving to newer hardware, hardware that would remove the limits of 1200 baud, probably something with an SDR base, and a whole new way of defining the protocols we use. Something designed from the ground up, not something that uses clever tricks to make old hardware work in a new way. 

We are kind of stuck in a rut today because there’s so much old hardware out there that we don’t want to throw out. But that old hardware handcuffs us to 1200 baud. 

I’m not going to be the one to lead the charge, but there are some really smart cookies out there that are building some cutting edge hardware that might be a base for the next big thing to take over for APRS. For that to succeed, we need to be willing to let the old hardware go, and embrace new technologies. 

It’s up to all of us to be willing to help the next big thing become that big thing. 

James
VE6SRV 

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 3:38 PM Greg D <ko6th.greg@...> wrote:
Yep.  MFJ-1278T in use here.  Seems a waste to run it in KISS-1200 mode, given it's huge mailbox and added 2400bps modem, but such is progress...

Greg  KO6TH


Brian Webster via groups.io wrote:

They work great for APRS, any program that needs a kiss TNC. I still run my daily. The only time it’s not ideal is when you need the TNC on a node site that needs special firmware in the eprom. Only a few TNC’s that are TAPR 2 clones (paccomm, MFJ 1270 series) are suitable for those chips. Normal packet users can use just about any type of TNC. The PK88 uses the same command set as a TNC2.

 

Brian N2KGC

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob & Jane
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 4:03 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] Old TNC's

 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?


--
James
VE6SRV


Re: Old TNC's

Greg D
 

Yep.  MFJ-1278T in use here.  Seems a waste to run it in KISS-1200 mode, given it's huge mailbox and added 2400bps modem, but such is progress...

Greg  KO6TH


Brian Webster via groups.io wrote:

They work great for APRS, any program that needs a kiss TNC. I still run my daily. The only time it’s not ideal is when you need the TNC on a node site that needs special firmware in the eprom. Only a few TNC’s that are TAPR 2 clones (paccomm, MFJ 1270 series) are suitable for those chips. Normal packet users can use just about any type of TNC. The PK88 uses the same command set as a TNC2.

 

Brian N2KGC

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob & Jane
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 4:03 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] Old TNC's

 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?



Re: Old TNC's

Brian Webster
 

They work great for APRS, any program that needs a kiss TNC. I still run my daily. The only time it’s not ideal is when you need the TNC on a node site that needs special firmware in the eprom. Only a few TNC’s that are TAPR 2 clones (paccomm, MFJ 1270 series) are suitable for those chips. Normal packet users can use just about any type of TNC. The PK88 uses the same command set as a TNC2.

 

Brian N2KGC

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob & Jane
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 4:03 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] Old TNC's

 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?


Old TNC's

Bob & Jane
 

Where does an AES PK-88 fit into this list?


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

James Jones, AB4D
 

That is modern by what I am using. My original KPC3, it only had firmware version 5.1, so I burned a new EPROM with the last available firmware Ver 8.2.

Still works great for APRS.

 

Jim AB4D


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Glenn O'Connor
 

http://aprsisce.wikidot.com/d710


Re: New User - Hello

Steve
 

a passcode has been sent offlist

73
Steve,  KF6WAX

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 8:57 AM Peter VK3PYE <vk3pye@...> wrote:
Hello to everyone, from Melbourne Australia.

I am already registered with the aprs.fi web page, and have a passcode there, so do I need new a Passcode for APRSIS/CE the Windows version?

I have an FT3DR and been enjoying the APRS features on that. So, I'm looking forward to trying out your application for Windows 8.1. I'm going to try and team it up with an FT-7900 that I have. Not sure how to do that just yet. More learning to do. Fun stuff this Ham Radio.

7 3 de Pete VK3PYE / VK3YPE


New User - Hello

Peter VK3PYE
 

Hello to everyone, from Melbourne Australia.

I am already registered with the aprs.fi web page, and have a passcode there, so do I need new a Passcode for APRSIS/CE the Windows version?

I have an FT3DR and been enjoying the APRS features on that. So, I'm looking forward to trying out your application for Windows 8.1. I'm going to try and team it up with an FT-7900 that I have. Not sure how to do that just yet. More learning to do. Fun stuff this Ham Radio.

7 3 de Pete VK3PYE / VK3YPE


Re: Telemetry

Robert Bruninga
 

THey would be separate packets.  One packet would contain the value as air temperature and the other packet would contain the value for water temp.  This is not to suggest more packets on the air!  But to suggest that low-rate changing telemetry items can be shared this way but their sampling then is effectively half.  Using PTT to toggle a flipflop to alternate the switching in of values would be one way to do it.  Bob


On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 3:25 AM Kako Lizares via groups.io <kilo_279=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


On Friday, October 16, 2020, 06:39:41 AM GMT+8, Fred Hillhouse <fmhillhouse@...> wrote:


Hi Bob,

 

You mentioned you can get 10 channels of data. One example was charging/discharging a battery. Those two items are exclusive of each other. But if I had, for example, air temperature and water temperature and those were in the “333” location (T#sss,111,222,333,444,555...), do I send two packets? One packet for the lower half (000-499) and another packet for the upper half (500-999)? Or does the packet end up being longer as in, T#sss,111,222,333,444,555,666,777,888,999,000?

 

Thank you!

 

Best regards,

Fred N7FMH

 

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 11:48 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: Re: [APRSISCE] Telemetry

 

OOPS,

Apparently I never wrote it into the spec, just asuemd everyone agreed it made sense.

So I did add it to the APRS1.2 page in April of this year.

See spec additions:  http://aprs.org/aprs12.html

THe original spec was clearly defined as 5 channels of fixed 3 digit values.  It became obvious that 000-999 also fit within the fields and so it made no sense to limit values to 000-255

 

Bob

 

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 11:42 PM Robert Bruninga via groups.io <bruninga=usna.edu@groups.io> wrote:

All of my APRS satellites have assumed that 000-999 is perfectly legit in the standard telemetry format.

And other telemetry projects of mine.  I think I changed the spec in about 2004, though AE5PL refuses to acknowledge it in his decoders.

'bob

 

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 6:09 PM Lynn Deffenbaugh <kj4erj@...> wrote:

Nope.  I don't remember that, but Hessu has proposed extending beyond
the 0-255 values and there's also a Mic-E version of telemetry that goes
directly in the position packet comment.

Do you have a reference for Bob's proposal?

Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32

On 10/13/2020 5:12 PM, Fred Hillhouse wrote:
> Hi Lynn,
>
> It seems not that long ago that Bob, WB4APR, mentioned a possibility to have
> more telemetry by flipping a bit in the packet. Did you see the post and
> have you done anything to possibly support it?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
> Fred N7FMH
>
>
>







Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com



Re: Telemetry

Kako Lizares
 



On Friday, October 16, 2020, 06:39:41 AM GMT+8, Fred Hillhouse <fmhillhouse@...> wrote:


Hi Bob,

 

You mentioned you can get 10 channels of data. One example was charging/discharging a battery. Those two items are exclusive of each other. But if I had, for example, air temperature and water temperature and those were in the “333” location (T#sss,111,222,333,444,555...), do I send two packets? One packet for the lower half (000-499) and another packet for the upper half (500-999)? Or does the packet end up being longer as in, T#sss,111,222,333,444,555,666,777,888,999,000?

 

Thank you!

 

Best regards,

Fred N7FMH

 

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io [mailto:APRSISCE@groups.io] On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 11:48 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: Re: [APRSISCE] Telemetry

 

OOPS,

Apparently I never wrote it into the spec, just asuemd everyone agreed it made sense.

So I did add it to the APRS1.2 page in April of this year.

See spec additions:  http://aprs.org/aprs12.html

THe original spec was clearly defined as 5 channels of fixed 3 digit values.  It became obvious that 000-999 also fit within the fields and so it made no sense to limit values to 000-255

 

Bob

 

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 11:42 PM Robert Bruninga via groups.io <bruninga=usna.edu@groups.io> wrote:

All of my APRS satellites have assumed that 000-999 is perfectly legit in the standard telemetry format.

And other telemetry projects of mine.  I think I changed the spec in about 2004, though AE5PL refuses to acknowledge it in his decoders.

'bob

 

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 6:09 PM Lynn Deffenbaugh <kj4erj@...> wrote:

Nope.  I don't remember that, but Hessu has proposed extending beyond
the 0-255 values and there's also a Mic-E version of telemetry that goes
directly in the position packet comment.

Do you have a reference for Bob's proposal?

Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32

On 10/13/2020 5:12 PM, Fred Hillhouse wrote:
> Hi Lynn,
>
> It seems not that long ago that Bob, WB4APR, mentioned a possibility to have
> more telemetry by flipping a bit in the packet. Did you see the post and
> have you done anything to possibly support it?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
> Fred N7FMH
>
>
>







Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com



Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Arte Booten
 

Somewhere around here I've got one of its ancestors, a PCB-88. That's a PK-88 on a full length ISA board to mount inside the computer. I've also got a HAL P-38 HF modem. Similar form factor, does RTTY,  AMTOR,  PACTOR  I & CLOVER. Now, if I could find an old PC that could fit them ...


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Ramakrishnan K.A.
 

I want to know how I can use Kenwood 710 for aprs if you can guide me


On Sat, Nov 7, 2020, 3:03 AM Glenn O'Connor <ka0lnr37@...> wrote:
Just thought I would share to the group which vintage TNC I'm using.


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Patrick Connor
 

And a Radio Shack power supply. That's sooooo last century.

Patrick (N3TSZ)


On Friday, November 6, 2020, 04:52:51 PM EST, Glenn O'Connor <ka0lnr37@...> wrote:


One doesn't see the AEA, now Timewave, products get much acknowledgment. That -900 is ca early 90's.

Even the APRS To-call doesn't list the manufacturer's product, past or present.


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Glenn O'Connor
 

One doesn't see the AEA, now Timewave, products get much acknowledgment. That -900 is ca early 90's.

Even the APRS To-call doesn't list the manufacturer's product, past or present.


Re: My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Don Eklund
 

Wow nice.   I never saw one of those before. 

 

 

 

From: APRSISCE@groups.io <APRSISCE@groups.io> On Behalf Of Glenn O'Connor
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 4:34 PM
To: APRSISCE@groups.io
Subject: [APRSISCE] My TNC...an oldie but goodie

 

Just thought I would share to the group which vintage TNC I'm using.


My TNC...an oldie but goodie

Glenn O'Connor
 

Just thought I would share to the group which vintage TNC I'm using.


Re: Object PHG settings

Randy Allen
 

Bob,

Understood.

73

Randy KA0AZS


Re: Object PHG settings

Robert Bruninga
 

The PHG circles are drawn at HALF the calculated range to account for about 6 dB of mobile loss due to flutter, etc.
Most programs also allow you to draw then full size which might work for some fixed stations, but not fo r mobiles so are very misleading

bob

On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 11:56 AM Randy Allen <ka0azs@...> wrote:
James,

Roger that.  I am aware of the differences between AGL, MSL and HAAT.

The heights were given to me by the Trustee.  Since one of the numbers does not match where I know the antenna is AGL, I'm assuming he took that into consideration. I'll discuss it with him next time we talk.  This is my first approximation.

Right now I think the transmitted PHG circle is actually smaller than the actual coverage.  We don't have a lot of data yet as the sites have only been really advertised recently as we have been gearing up for the Red Cross Winlink drill this month.  (I'm less than 5 miles from the site and am literally line of sight to tower when I step outside of my house)

As we get in actual user reports I'll look into adjusting numbers to match actual coverage as close as possible.  And by actual user I mean a user on the ground.  I know the Digi can reach another Winlink RMS 30 miles south of here, but since both are on high towers, I'm not figuring that into our coverage area.

Hopefully the Red Cross drill will give us some additional data on the actual coverage.

Thanks

73

Randy KA0AZS

701 - 720 of 35661