I forgot to add the link to the photo: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tracker2/attachments/folder/813238867/it em/1889627634/view
--- In [email protected], "Broncus" <fmhillho...@...> wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > I figured out why the difference. It should have been obvious to me at the > time. Doh! > > This is the fill-in digipeater and it is displayed correctly: > PNRDVL>APN383:!4259.89N107130.40W#PHG6130/W1 Fill-InPinardvill N7FMH > $GPWPL,4259.89,N,07130.40,W,PNRDVL*41 > $PGRMW,PNRDVL,0,4007,PHG6130/W1 Fill-InPinardvill N7FMH *6C > > This is an object from the fill-in which is not displayed correctly: > PNRDVL>BEACON:;147.135NH*111111z4258.99N/07135.36WrT100 r25m S.Uncan MT > $GPWPL,4258.99,N,07135.36,W,147.135NH*7A > $PGRMW,147.135NH,0,4007,T100 r25m S.Uncan MT *0F > > The LCD displays the station that sent the object rather than the object > itself. In this case, the object is "147.135NH". > > I believe my formatting in the fill-in is correct which means the OT2 is not > doing the right thing. > > The attachments are still online for review. > > Thanks for looking into this! > > Best regards, > Fred > > > > --- In [email protected], Scott Miller <scott@> wrote: > > > > Hmmm. Is the reported distance consistent? Can you send me an example > > of a raw packet that it's reporting incorrectly? > > > > Scott > > > > Fred Hillhouse wrote: > > > > > > > > > HI Scott, > > > > > > That is correct. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Fred > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > > > *On Behalf Of *Scott Miller > > > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2009 00:24 > > > *To:* [email protected] > > > *Subject:* Re: [tracker2] Distance calculations > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that showing 4 miles on the LCD and 0.27 miles on the GPS? > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > Fred Hillhouse wrote: > > > > > > > > [Attachment(s) <#TopText> from Fred Hillhouse included below] > > > > > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > I noticed a slight distance discrepancy the other day and > > > captured a photo. > > > > Or I have a incorrect setting. I am good with either option. It > > > looks like > > > > the range calculations are okay when the distance is close but > > > not when it > > > > is further way. I have seen this several times. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Fred > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
