[Xastir] A good time for APRS at 9600?

[Tom Hayward]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 21:20, Guy Story <kc5goi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This  question comes up every so often.  I use to wonder the same thing years ago.  If memory serves me correctly, and I know this is not verbatim, WB4APR said that given the length of a posit in relation to the transmit time and the txdelay, 9600 does not really pay off.  The txdelay would eat up more time than the actual posit.

9600 baud data is 8 times as fast as 1200 baud. When you factor in the
txdelay and length of an average APRS packet, 9600 baud APRS comes out
to about twice as fast as 1200 baud. To me, that seems significant
enough to be worthwhile.

In the Pacific Northwest, there are a number of people experimenting
with 9600 baud APRS. They have a reasonable network of i-gates and
digipeaters. They've shown a couple of things: 9600 baud works for
APRS; it can be more reliable for mobiles (less chance flutter will
corrupt the packet, because the data burst is so short); and it ends
up doing more for the network than halving the bandwidth because it
moves a lot of stations off 144.39 and onto an alternate channel. Most
of that network is Kenwood D700's, D710's, D7's and D72's.

Tom KD7LXL