[OZAPRS] Beacon Intervals - Reminder

[Terry Neumann]

Andrew Rich (Home) wrote:

> Here's a thought for you
>  
> If I keyed up on 145.175 MHz on the top of a hill that would be 
> considered intentional interrference
>  
> So at at what point does a high beacon rate border on being interference ?
>  
> There is NO protection against it.

Unless of course we realise/remember that we are using a shared resource 
which requires us all to co-operate in our usage of the system for the 
common good of all users.   And that's one of the things we do in 
amateur radio.  Along with not using 400 watts of SSB on the "wrong" 
sideband, or in the middle of the CW segment of a band; or using 
unacceptable language on the repeaters; or tuning up on HF on top of an 
exiting QSO (and taking 60 seconds to do it); or beaconing one's 
position on APRS every three seconds.....  you get the drift.

Fact is that APRS more than any other mode requires, and indeed demands 
that kind of co-operation.

> So at at what point does a high beacon rate border on being interference ?

There is no concrete point at which this might happen.  However those 
who have been in this game for a while have determined certain 
parameters as a basis for the co-operative usage of the APRS system to 
the mutual benefit of all users.    These parameters are well publicised 
- admittedly you need to belong to a group like this be aware of them, 
or else take the trouble to search for them - but they exist, and they 
are there for a reason.  Those who choose to do otherwise out of 
ignorance can be excused - for a little while.  However, as in any of 
the instances above, they need, in time, to learn about the basics of 
co-operation with others to the benefit of all users.

> There is NO protection against it.

Correct - but only to a degree.    You see, there is no protection 
against people driving in the centre lane 20 kph below the speed 
limit.   There is no protection against someone waiting at the traffic 
lights for ten seconds after the green light before moving off.   There 
is no protection against someone breaking wind in a crowded lift.   
There is no protection against people acting selfishly on the amateur 
bands.   But one of the things that distinguishes us from lower forms of 
life is that (usually) formal protection from any of the above quite 
legal (but totally unacceptable behaviour) rarely becomes necessary.

Education is the answer.   If after education, the selfish behaviour 
continues then other means of "enforcing'  co-operation  may come into 
play.  But of course that won't be necessary  will it.   I'm sure that 
once people know how the system works, and why it needs to work within 
the voluntary guidelines set out by those who have thought about these 
things, they will be happy to co-operate.

73
Terry


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aprs.net.au/pipermail/ozaprs/attachments/20090830/979a8a1e/attachment.htm