[WARC] Some thoughts, suggestions, comments, and philosophy regarding the clubs on-going discussion on infrastructure

[Len Litvan]

Hi Erik,

These proposals seem to make good sense to me.  We preserve the basic, 
proven repeater approach which will permit maximum reliability and 
maximum participation by hams.  After the fox hunt experience, the 
challenges of working into and out of the "holes" in Winona County and 
surrounding areas were really driven home to me, so the portable 
repeater stations seem to be a valuable, flexible resource to have 
available.

Voice with the portable repeaters is good.  Wish we could do it all at 
once, but know that doing it in phases in more realistic.

Digital linking as priority three makes sense.  (Did I read that APRS 
has an add-on with capability for longer text messages???)

I like the proposals.  Thanks for your leadership in putting the ideas 
together.

Sincerely,
Len KC0RSX

Erik Brom wrote:
> Hi Jerry,
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> As I continue to mull this over, I'm coming to a multi-phase plan:
> 1.  Replace our current 64, 835, and 444 repeaters with brand new 
> equipment, salvaging only a few items, but still doing the same 
> thing.  440 will be geared towards repeating data signals in addition 
> to voice.  All of these repeaters would be built with "remote base" 
> type capability, to be used in phase 3.
>      Also as part of phase 1, building one to three portable platforms 
> as Jim proposed.  These would come with power and 2m APRS digipeaters 
> with weather stations.
>      This phase should also include doing whatever is necessary to get 
> the fixed stations, such as the EOC, operating up to par, including 
> voice and APRS.
> 2.  Add voice repeaters to the portable platforms.  These would also 
> have the capability to link into the main repeaters.
> 3.  Digital linking to be defined.  This would include bringing "the 
> Internet" to affected areas.
>
> I would see us trying to raise funds for phases 1 and 2 immediately, 
> leaving 3 "for later". 
>
> I have been reading about echo link, IRLP, etc.  One way of using 
> these is a "home" station that is set up to link into a repeater.  
> This can be done with pretty basic equipment, and a high speed 
> Internet connection.  This sounds like something that could easily be 
> made portable, so it could be taken where needed.  Pairs of these 
> could also be used to create links between repeaters, and it could be 
> done over a high speed digital link we create, and/or the Internet.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
> At 07:40 PM 11/26/07, you wrote:
>>
>>    1. Both the Oct and Nov, 2007, issues of QST,  "Correspondence" 
>>       columns, gives some interesting comments particularly in regard
>>       to digital vs analog and D-STAR.  Reading between the lines,
>>       when it comes to D-STAR, I think that one has to step back a
>>       little (maybe a lot) and the one thing that is rather obvious
>>       that right away begins to stand out is that we read, (at least
>>       I do)  is D-STAR = BIG BUCKS!   Realizing, of course, that this
>>       digital "thingy" is still very much in its infancy, especially
>>       when utilized in amateur radio.  Yes, we have to start
>>       somewhere.  But why not let industry spend some of its
>>       resources getting things off the ground and working out the
>>       bugs.  As consumers of their products, we hams will ultimately
>>       pay for them anyway.  In the meantime, let's consider working
>>       with and improving the basic analog infrastructure that we
>>       already have operating....minimal cost and much to be gained. 
>>       This way, we'll have something that we know will work, from the
>>       get-go and can be built upon when the "new" technology has
>>       proven itself.   Call me "old fashioned", "stuck in the 20th
>>       century", or whatever, but remember, how long ago the light
>>       bulb was invented and it still works just fine.  Newer isn't
>>       necessarily always better.
>>    2. Reading "It Seems to Us" is also worthwhile time well spent. 
>>    3. You also might want to peruse pages 74-77, including Gary
>>       Pearce's side bar comment on page 77, on D-STAR.  This stuff is
>>       all part and parcel of the "whole ball of wax".
>>    4. Although I'm not really a proponent for ICOM products, I feel
>>       that they do need to be commended for the work that they have
>>       on the efforts and ground work they have laid in the area of
>>       amateur radio digital communication.  Some may complain that
>>       they currently hold a monopoly on the market and, therefore,
>>       sort of control the prices.  But, is this really fair to them? 
>>       I don't think so.  Do you see any of the other "big guns" 
>>       doing anything in this area right now?  If they are, they
>>       certainly are very quiet about it or else are doing it in an
>>       encrypted fashion. 
>>    5. Finally, we all need to have an open mind about all of this and
>>       steadily, slowly, firmly proceed---one step at a time.
>>
>> "73"
>> Jerry Brancich, WAØX
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>
>>
>> Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your 
>> homepage. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51443/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WARC mailing list
>> WARC at lists.w0ne.org
>> http://lists.w0ne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/warc
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> WARC mailing list
> WARC at lists.w0ne.org
> http://lists.w0ne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/warc
>