Ed, Even when All USA and other messages were blocked from going through the network, it was still too slow for practical use like we have on the internet. Other than for emergency use, packet could not compete with the rich content of the internet, especially after the advent of the web.
D-Star digital data on VHF/UHF is unfortunately no faster than 1200 baud and perhaps a bit slower. When we use the term 1200 baud, that is the baud rate during the time of the transmission. The actual data throughput can often be half of the maximum with good signals and no collisions or even less with other conditions. The microwave D-Star would have had a lot more impact if it had been available a decade or two earlier, since it is more than double the speed of Dale Heatherington's, WA4DSY 56 kbs modem of the late 1980's. It is quite impressive to have such a convenient package compared to the relatively expensive modem driving a transverter and then perhaps an amplifier. At one time I wanted to try 56 kbs, but there was no other interest. The D-Star 1.2 GHz, frequency is better at penetrating tree leaves which are problematical at 2.4 GHz, even with a few watts of power. I used to have a WiMax internet link at about 7 miles point to point and it could not tolerate a line of sight interruption. But the cost is still quite substantial and may find use in linking point to point. I don't see this as practical for normal voice communications since most hams are on 2 meters. In other words, it is difficult to find other than a niche market. One thing that might make VHF/UHF D-Star more useful would be to move to a newer design that can use the full 4800 bps for voice when you want voice, and also use this same speed for data, when you want data. 73, Rick, KV9U Ed Woodrick wrote: > So I'll add a few more cents. > > Packet died in the US because it was too popular for what it could do. > The number of For Sale messages and announcements that were sent > worldwide just overwhelmed users and BBSs. It came to the point that > there was too much content and nothing that you wanted to read. > > And while there were faster networks, 1200 bps was the standard and it > was slow. And it gets real slow when you add other 1200 baud nodes or > digipeaters to the path. And BTW, you will never even get 1200 bps > sustained throughput, as the turn-around for most radios is abysmal. > > And in this entire thread, I'm surprised that I haven't seen any > comments about D-STAR! 960 bps is built into every radio and the ID-1 > can do 128 kbps. It's not AX.25, but it is packet digital data. It's > pretty cool to put two ID-1s back to back and watch the amount of data > that can be transfered. And since the ID-1 have Ethernet jacks, that > means that you can do any Internet protocol that you want. > > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
