Re: Can we do an offset
--- In email@example.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
> 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
> 73 Phillip
> -------Original Message-------
> From: kb9lgs
> Date: 11/08/2008 11:05:43 a.m.
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [tracker2] Re: Can we do an offset
> --- In email@example.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
> > 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
> > 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