Re: [Xastir] maps at aprs.tamu.edu

2007-07-09 Thread Lee Bengston

On 7/9/07, Tom Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>"Tiger/Line 2003 data converted to shapefile format is available from
>  ftp://aprs.tamu.edu/. Look in the "pub/TIGER_2006_SE/" directory."

This is an editing mistake I made when updating the page to point at the
new
data.  I changed the paths and other places where "2003" was, but missed
this one.

Obviously, the TIGER_2006_SE directory is the 2006 second edition stuff,
more up to date than TIGER2006.




Thanks - seems obvious now given the 2006_SE directory and associated files
have newer dates.  Oh well, it must be Monday.  Sounds like I will like the
2006_SE maps even better.

Lee - K5DAT
Murphy, TX
___
Xastir mailing list
Xastir@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir


Re: [Xastir] maps at aprs.tamu.edu

2007-07-09 Thread Tom Russo
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 09:10:03PM -0500, we recorded a bogon-computron 
collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
>  Hello,
> 
>  Quick question on the maps posted at ftp://aprs.tamu.edu - the following
>  lines are taken from the HowTo Maps portion of the Wiki:
> 
>"Tiger/Line 2003 data converted to shapefile format is available from
>  ftp://aprs.tamu.edu/. Look in the "pub/TIGER_2006_SE/" directory."

This is an editing mistake I made when updating the page to point at the new
data.  I changed the paths and other places where "2003" was, but missed 
this one.

Obviously, the TIGER_2006_SE directory is the 2006 second edition stuff,
more up to date than TIGER2006.

I'll fix the wiki now.

>"The 2006 Second Edition data were processed by Jason Winningham and made
>  available on the ftp://aprs.tamu.edu/ site by Gerry Creager"
> 
>  If the 2003 files are in the /pub/TIGER_2006_SE/ directory, does that mean
>  the 2006 2nd Edition files are in /pub/TIGER2006/  ?

No, the newest information is in the TIGER_2006_SE directory.

The TIGER2006 directory contains only the linear features, and is from the
first edition.  The TIGER_2006_SE contains both linear and area features.
That's the stuff you want.  It is organized differently, though.  The person
who did the TIGER2006 files organized and labeled the file by FIPS code, and 
the 2006_SE files are organized by state and county name.

-- 
Tom RussoKM5VY   SAR502   DM64ux  http://www.swcp.com/~russo/
Tijeras, NM  QRPL#1592 K2#398  SOC#236 AHTB#1 http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?DDTNM
"And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is
 one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh,
 oooh, the sky is the limit!"  --- The Tick
___
Xastir mailing list
Xastir@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir


[Xastir] maps at aprs.tamu.edu

2007-07-09 Thread Lee Bengston

Hello,

Quick question on the maps posted at ftp://aprs.tamu.edu - the following
lines are taken from the HowTo Maps portion of the Wiki:

  "Tiger/Line 2003 data converted to shapefile format is available from
ftp://aprs.tamu.edu/. Look in the "pub/TIGER_2006_SE/" directory."

  "The 2006 Second Edition data were processed by Jason Winningham and made
available on the ftp://aprs.tamu.edu/ site by Gerry Creager"

If the 2003 files are in the /pub/TIGER_2006_SE/ directory, does that mean
the 2006 2nd Edition files are in /pub/TIGER2006/  ?

Anyway, over the weekend I downloaded the Texas map package from
/pub/TIGER2006/, and I liked the improvement over the online Tiger maps with
respect to detail and being more up to date, and I especially liked the fact
that when set to a higher level than the weather radar maps, the weather in
the radar map still appears, but does not hide the Tiger map details.
Obviously the maps I downloaded are transparent and show the layers below,
which is really great.  I assume that's because they are shapefiles?  I
already liked combining the radar with the online Tiger maps, but combining
it with the downloaded maps is awesome.

Hats off to the developers - this is really good stuff.

Lee - K5DAT
Murphy, TX
___
Xastir mailing list
Xastir@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir


Re: [Xastir] Position rate possibility....

2007-07-09 Thread James Ewen

> 2) Moving mode. Me sees three possibilities here: A) fixed time
> beaconing; B) Fixed distance beaconing; C) Speed based beaconing.  I
> would prefer speed based beaconing. Instead of having threshold points,
> I would make the time change linear. Have an X-Y formula: X being speed;
> Y being distance. Both end points on both axes are settable. At slower
> speeds, you usually are working city streets. This would require more
> transmissions because of the Urban Canyon issue and there are more
> opportunities to radically change course. This would avoid the big
> position jump on a track where you look at a map and see someone halfway
> across the county changing directions.



Beaconing faster at slower speeds is diametrically opposite to the
SmartBeaconing concept, as well as your fixed distance concept.

With a fixed distance concept, you beacon slower at slow speeds due to
the time required to cover the set distance. At slow speeds you beacon
at a slower rate because the amount of error in your distance
accumulates at a slower rate. The idea is to be able to have a circle
of ambiguity that you will find the station within. The faster the
station is travelling the faster you have to beacon to be able to keep
the circle of ambiguity the same size.

Because we send speed and course information with our packets, we can
reduce that circle of ambiguity down to an arc. We can dead reckon a
station's position until the next beacon is heard. This works great
unless the station makes course changes before the next beacon is
scheduled. The sooner the station makes that course change after a
beacon, the more ambiguity there can be.

CornerPegging is what make sure that we are informed of any course
changes that happen between the time/distance based beacons. We set a
minimum course deviation that we want to report called minimum turn
angle. If we choose to only report course deviations of 45 degrees or
more, so that we don't beacon a whole lot in town when making lane
changes and such, then we can still get well out of that ambiguity arc
when cruising down the highway, and make a moderate bend in the road.
Using turn slope divided by the speed allows us to set a minimum turn
angle for the highway speed, yet still requires a much larger course
deviation at slow speeds so we don't go crazy in town.



   The HamHUD used to send extra beacons in the event it didn't receive a
digi repeating it's own signal.  It was taken out, I think because of
other people complaining about channel congestion, but I'm not 100% sure
of that -- it's been several years.



The HamHUD used to listen for a digipeat to come back, and if it
didn't hear that, it would beacon again. We got flack about that.
Because of the nature of mobile packet radio propagation, and the need
for packets to be copied 100%, it is possible for the packet sent to
be copied properly at the digipeater, digipeated, and then not heard
at the mobile that originated the packet.

APRS is a send and forget protocol... You can not be guaranteed that
others hear your packet. You can not be guaranteed that you will hear
every packet. You need to send your packets when you should, and
continue along your way.



> 3) Dealing with turns. This seems to be a sore spot - corner pegging. We
> only have a max data rate of 1 secoud out of most GPS units. So what I
> would do is modify the sending rate based on the degrees turned and
> instead of using a lookup table, I would use maybe cos^2 or cos^3 of the
> angle change as the modfier. Modify from the current beaconing rate down
> to 1 sec beaconing at >= 90 degrees. Here in Wisconsin, U-turns are
> legal so those would have to be covered.



No sore spot with CornerPegging... It works great. It's interesting
now that you want GPS updates faster than every second. It used to
confound the problem... There is no lookup table for CornerPegging. It
is simple math. We compare the heading change since beacon to the turn
threshold. If it is greater, and it has been longer than the minimum
turn time, we send another beacon. In the math limited
microprocessors, it is difficult to do squares and cubes of a cosine
of an angle if not impossible. Why you would want to increase
beaconing to every second while turning is a little confusing. The
"problem" that you are trying to solve is excessive beaconing, and
your solution increases the beacon rate.



> Now if I have covered old ground, forgive me. These are just thoughts.



Look at the descriptions of SmartBeaconing and CornerPegging on the Wiki.
http://info.aprs.net/wikka.php?wakka=SmartBeaconing
http://info.aprs.net/wikka.php?wakka=CornerPegging

Look at the description of the SmartBeaconing and CornerPegging
concepts and implementation on the HamHUD site.
http://www.hamhud.net/hh2/smartbeacon.html

It is always better to try modifying or reinventing something by first
understanding how it works.


James
VE6SRV
___
Xastir mailing list
Xas