3 ms·
This. I like the idea of Meshtastic however APRS is much more extensive and even has satellite coverage like the ISS.
by firesteelrain 1y ago
This. I like the idea of Meshtastic however APRS is much more extensive and even has satellite coverage like the ISS.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- rfmoz 1y agoIt would work a Meshtastic repeater from the ISS?
- NoiseBert69 1y agoLoRa is extremely robust and can work with super weak signals. At the price of being very very slow in the most reliable configuration . That combination is toxic for a high amount of parallel users. I think it would need big modifications: fast uplink and robust slow downlink.
- firesteelrain 1y agoIt would not. We would need to make a case to add Meshtastic. Amateur radio has had a much better chance since the days of the Space Shuttle. Astronauts routinely make ISS to Earth contacts with amateur radio operators. There is also ARISS. 5w ISS contacts are hard enough as it is
- Gigachad 1y agoAPRS requires a license right?
- firesteelrain 1y agoCorrect. Developed by the late Bob Bruninga. I had many email exchanges with Bob and we were able to send SSTV images through his NO-* series of amateur radio satellites with some technical advice a few years ago. APRS is much more extensive and even available via commercial ham radio
- Gigachad 1y agoThat's kind of the benefit of LoRa though. Cheap unlicensed radio that works surprisingly well for what it is.