TG 310 on Brandmeister Announcement

[bharvey2]

I have to say I'm confused as to how the solution of forcing TG310 to dynamic for everyone is going to correct the problem. As noted in the notice:

"In Kentucky, this resulted in people kerchunking the TG to "Listen" keeping the repeater keyed for many hours at a time and took out the amplifier. "

It seems to be that this fix will just make the kerchunking worse as now those who used to have a static TG310 will now be kerchunking.

 

[Hit_Factor]

I'm confused on how a kerchunk is harder on a repeater than any other traffic. I don't monitor the TAC TGs regularly, but they seemed to run almost non-stop.

 

[KC8ESL]

It isn't any harder. It's not about repeater finals blowing up, it's about using the network the way it was intended. The TACs were designed as a place to break off from North America, regional, State tg's and tie up 2 repeaters and not hundreds or thousands. If you really need to hear that stuff on the TAC tg, the hoseline should be used.

 

[N4GIX]

I'm confused on how a kerchunk is harder on a repeater than any other traffic. I don't monitor the TAC TGs regularly, but they seemed to run almost non-stop.

It isn't the "kerchunk" per se, but since dynamic talk groups have to be "activated" (i.e., connected), the "kerchunk" is what triggers the activation. If no traffic is heard for 15 contiguous minutes, the connection is dropped automatically.

Because "they seemed to run almost non-stop" the repeater would seldome time out and remain activated...

 

[bill4long]

Can anyone tell me why the easy solution is not for BM to just drop 310 link to DMRX? Then everyone be super terrific happy!

 

[N4GIX]

It's not the network(s); it's the users that cause the problems! Even if BM were to unlink "their 310" from DMR-MARC's 310, both networks would still have those users who insist on doing things their own way and ignoring the rules and courtesy.

 

[bill4long]

It's not the network(s); it's the users that cause the problems! Even if BM were to unlink "their 310" from DMR-MARC's 310, both networks would still have those users who insist on doing things their own way and ignoring the rules and courtesy.

If BM unlinked from DMRX, there would be no special rules about 310. Operators (mostly hotspotters) on there would just happily continue doing what they have been doing for 1.5 years, and DMRXers would be rid of them. I hope BM drops DMRX 310 for the sake of all. Sometimes a good divorce is better than a bad marriage.

 

[N4GIX]

If BM simply eliminated TAC310 through TAC319, then 'hotspotters' would not be able to use them at all, since all 'hotspots' can only connect to whatever BM offers.

 

[bill4long]

If BM simply eliminated TAC310 through TAC319, then 'hotspotters' would not be able to use them at all, since all 'hotspots' can only connect to whatever BM offers.

I didn't say eliminate 310. I said unlink 310 from DMRX.

These guys: DMRX | Core

 

[N4GIX]

You are incorrectly assuming that the "problem" originates on the DMRX side. I'm telling you that I know for an absolute certainty that users of BM (both radio and 'hotspot') are equally guilty of misusing TAC310-319, and several BM repeaters have had PA failures as a result.

 

[bill4long]

You are incorrectly assuming that the "problem" originates on the DMRX side. I'm telling you that I know for an absolute certainty that users of BM (both radio and 'hotspot') are equally guilty of misusing TAC310-319, and several BM repeaters have had PA failures as a result.

I didn't say it was DMRX originated the "problem." In fact, I said expressly stated in a prior post that it was BM's fault. Amd it wasn't hotspot operators' fault, because most of them were totally clueless about the situation and had no reasonable way of knowing about it. At any rate, what matters now is the solution. BM should drop TAC 310 (and 311 and 312) from DMRX. Problem solved. Horse dead. I'm done.

 

[RodStrong]

Anyway......let me interrupt this love fest to ask a question.

Where is the "new" tac 310 at now? I mean, where do all the hamsters hang out now that 310 got slam dunked? I've been trying to listen to 3100 mostly, and it's generally pretty quiet. What about the TAC 310 net on Sunday nights? I used to love listening to that car wreck. Is there some other tg people are flocking to? Help a brother out.

Thanks.

 

[bharvey2]

Anyway......let me interrupt this love fest to ask a question.

Where is the "new" tac 310 at now? I mean, where do all the hamsters hang out now that 310 got slam dunked? I've been trying to listen to 3100 mostly, and it's generally pretty quiet. What about the TAC 310 net on Sunday nights? I used to love listening to that car wreck. Is there some other tg people are flocking to? Help a brother out.

Thanks.

That's a good point. I usually leave my Openspot parked on 3100 when I'm just monitoring and I haven't really heard an uptick of traffic on it. Are people still on Tac310 and just haven't noticed that it's dynamic only?

 

[chilenet]

I loved TAC 310. Thanks for running TAC-310 as long as you did.
I was lucky enough to hear the digital river one time on 310. It sounded like hundreds of conversations in a few seconds.
TAC 310 seems it turned into a technical failure.
I have had my license for about a year. If I would have waited another 4 months I would have never known about TAC 310 and would have never known what I am now missing. It would almost be better that way. Sorry to say it but DMR just ain't the same.
I'm thinking about selling my hotspot. Will that help?

 

[EdmontonFireRadio]

310 is only one talkgroup. There are hundreds of other talkgroups that you can try. But if you still want to monitor TAC310 there is still a way to do it. Change to DMR Plus and select one of the servers such as IPSC2-CANTRBO. Using that server you can have continuous access to TAC310 and not need to keep keying your mic to keep the talkgroup alive. However if you are interested in trying a busy talkgroup on Brandmeister, try World Wide 91. There is enough activity there that should keep you occupied. Often so much that you can't even disconnect because you can't get enough time between transmissions to be able to send the disconnect command.

 

[nanZor]

This might be an opportunity for local organizations and clubs to introduce basics to those who never got any training so to speak on resource sharing.

That is:
1) DMR, designed to support business users, don't have 20 minute quick-key qso's. Breaks between transmissions are the norm.

2) Despite the amount of talkgroups supported by a local system, there are only TWO timeslots available.

And go from there. My disappointment with dmr is not really the technology or even the networks, but the lack of basic training in this area. Unless one understands the two points above as a starting point, dmr has turned away from a radio aspect into more of a phone-freaking hobby.

 

[EdmontonFireRadio]

I would also like to add that if you are going to have a longer conversation (10 minutes or more) and there are only two people talking, move from the talkgroup to private call. Using private call your transmission is routed between the two stations and you can talk all day without bothering anyone.

 

[nanZor]

There are a number of ways to share resources, but that seems like the last thing talked about to dmr newcomers.

Another is not being truthful to hotspot users who sound like crap, and having a 20 minute qso full of repeats, with only 2 minutes worth of real content. But, that does leave about 18 minutes of conversation just to repeat the very next day!

We can also save resources in the same manner by being truthful to the cross-mode operations that also sound like CRAP. Oh yeah, add a hotspot with dropped UDP packets during prime time. Through a bluetooth connection via commercial cellular.

Phone-phreaking at it's finest!

 

[DaveNF2G]

Using private call your transmission is routed between the two stations and you can talk all day without bothering anyone.

Except that you are still occupying a slot.

 

[kayn1n32008]

Except that you are still occupying a slot.

but you are not tying up every single connected repeater. Just one or two.