On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 19:55 -0400, Joseph Apuzzo wrote: > But then I'm thinking the info passed is "tweeat" like very short > messages like "120 casualties at location gps coordinates ..."
Joe, old bean, you must devote a few months to reading through the last decade of QST. Everything on your wish list so far has already been developed, deployed, put into regular use, improved, and written up for the common ham. It's not all in use in the Hudson Valley, but the technologies and techniques are out there. You should also spend some time snuggled up with the FCC regulations to understand the restrictions they place on licensed services and what transmission modes they permit on the frequencies allocated to each service. Much of what you're proposing is *not* permitted, for well and good reason. When you want low-speed, ultra-dependable, digital communication, you have plenty of choices: http://www.arrl.org/digital-data-modes For regional communication, you might prefer HF with an NVIS antenna, rather than a bunch of repeaters running down their batteries after the lights go out. It's not that all the good ideas have been developed, but *many* very bright people have devoted *much* more time to this than you might imagine at first glance... -- Ed http://softsolder.com _______________________________________________ Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium May 4 - Inkscape Jun 1 - Zimbra Jul 6 - Jul 2011
