Richard,<br><br>Is that just a unfiltered tap of the discriminator?<br><br>or something more exotic?<br><br>Grant.<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Richard Murnane <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Richard.Murnane@internode.on.net">Richard.Murnane@internode.on.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi Howard,<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Just wondering why we use 1200 baud for APRS and not 9600?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
A mix of technical and historical reasons.<br>
<br>
At 1200, you can just plug packet gear into mic/speaker sockets of an existing radio, without modifying the radio innards. If you want to use 9600, you have bypass some of the audio circuitry and get inside the radio.<br>
<br>
Newer radios can work with 9600, but there is an awful lot of older gear out there that still uses 1200, so it's probably not going anywhere soon.<br>
<br>
73 Richard VK2SKY<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OZAPRS mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au" target="_blank">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs" target="_blank">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>