Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Can we do an offset

Expand Messages
  • kb9lgs
    ... I am not talking about approval from a repeater council or something. If I was trying for a wide area coverage one I would do this, but this is just a fill
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 11, 2008
      --- In tracker2@yahoogroups.com, "Phillip" <zl2tze@...> wrote:

      I am not talking about approval from a repeater council or something.
      If I was trying for a wide area coverage one I would do this, but
      this is just a fill in to bring signals from a few miles around here
      to the main digies. Basically this area is kind of a radio hole so
      no APRS traffic gets out to anyone for about 5 miles around me. I
      have experimented and I can receive from most areas around me from
      this hill, and also can get to a main digi from there. The approval
      I referred to is that of the land owner. It is preliminary in that
      he wants details on exactly what I will put there before final
      approval is given. Basically if it won't bug him he is OK with it.

      I also will be getting with the more expert experts in our area about
      exactly what antenna and power I will want to use. Obviously the
      less power the less problems I will have in getting that power to the

      > Hi,
      > When you apply for your approval do you submit the location of
      > digi ?
      > If yes, is this then a Public record that any one can see.
      > I would have thought as long as the submitted location is held by
      > your authority and you place the device at that location any thing
      > from it
      > in the form of a LAT/LONG or mobile data passing is 3rd party or am I
      > wrong.
      > 73 Phillip
      > ZL2TZE
      > -------Original Message-------
      > From: kb9lgs
      > Date: 11/08/2008 11:05:43 a.m.
      > To: tracker2@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [tracker2] Re: Can we do an offset
      > --- In tracker2@yahoogroups.com, Scott Miller <scott@> wrote:
      > Interesting about the part 97. Good point.
      > The geographic test thing might do the trick. We could use a fill in
      > digi in my general location. I have preliminary approval to put
      > something on top of a hill about a half mile away from the home QTH.
      > There is no power or anything there, so I will need to do something
      > like solar and a battery. Anyway what I was intending to do with the
      > offset was set it so that the unit looked like it was at my house. But
      > your solution would also work great.
      > >
      > > I've thought about doing that, but I'm afraid it might run afoul of
      > Part
      > > 97's prohibition on anything meant to conceal the meaning of a
      > >
      > > Part of the reason I added the geographic area test to the scripting
      > > language is for this sort of application - for example, a sailboat in
      > > its slip could beacon a less precise fixed position (or no
      position at
      > > all) and then automatically start reporting exact positions when it
      > > moves out of the harbor.
      > >
      > > Scott
      > >
      > > kb9lgs wrote:
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > I have an interesting question. I am thinking of an unattended
      > > > operation mode, and am not sure I want to give out the unit's exact
      > > > position, but would like to be able to find the exact position if
      > > > someone were to actually move it. So I was wondering if there is a
      > > > way to take the GPS coordinates and add an offset to them?
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
      > Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1603 - Release Date:
      > 6:13 PM
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.