Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+APRS\s+for\s+rovers\s+\-\s+does\s+it\s+help\s+or\s+hurt\s+\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] APRS for rovers - does it help or hurt ? (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 08:46:16 -0500
Hi Steve and all. Good discussion. As you may know, I am both an active rover and the Dakota VUAC representative so I watch this discussion from both perspectives. While HamIM is allowed per the curr
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2007-08/msg00062.html (8,869 bytes)

2. Re: [VHFcontesting] APRS for rovers - does it help or hurt ? (score: 1)
Author: "John D'Ausilio" <jdausilio@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 11:55:19 -0400
I believe the discussions so far would prohibit relayed APRS .. the fixed station would have to directly receive the rover's APRS packets .. I don't have a problem with it, but without widespread ado
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2007-08/msg00064.html (8,189 bytes)

3. Re: [VHFcontesting] APRS for rovers - does it help or hurt ? (score: 1)
Author: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:16:17 -0600
Agreed. I've taken APRS along on one rove, and dropped it the next year, because as I asked around the locals "anyone see me on there last weekend?" the answers were all "I never even looked", or "I
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2007-08/msg00071.html (15,350 bytes)

4. Re: [VHFcontesting] APRS for rovers - does it help or hurt ? (score: 1)
Author: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 03:29:34 -0700 (PDT)
-- Original Message -- I don't have a problem with it, but without widespread adoption it's not something that's going to the top of my todo list for the Jitney. SDR, reflocking, networking, etc are
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2007-08/msg00085.html (7,668 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu