Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2009:bb_packet_options [2009/10/20 13:08] – created tomgee
+++ 2009:bb_packet_options [2009/10/20 13:29] (current) – tomgee
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
   * Pro: compact, low power, low cost
   * Con: No radio
+  * Implementation: An AVR hub would gather sensor data including a weather station and use a smart algorithm to send data to the radio. A separate low cost, low power radio would be required .
+  * Cost: $57 kit form plus radio. Can probably use the Yaesu, although the Yaesu is targeted for use in the base.
+==== Micro Trak 8000 AF ====
+This is a one way packet transmission system. It's compact, medium cost and is self contained. The radio, which is frequency agile, is onboard. This can be repurposed into a vehicle position tracker once it's no longer used at BB.
+  * Pro: ultra compact, low power, medium cost. Includes Radio
+  * Con: Only sends one way.
+  * Implementation: Uses the AVR hub as before but a radio is not required.
+  * Cost: $190 built and tested, ready to go.
+==== Hansen TNC ====
+This is a klugy board but it probably works. It can be used in the interim to test a system. It still needs a radio to function.
+  * Pro: Already have one. Low power, free. It's not compact and is probably not reliable. It would be bidirectional.
+  * Con: Kludgy, needs a radio.
+  * Implementation: For testing it may work well. For a radio I would use one of the RS handheld units.
+  * Free.
+**Conclusion:** I need to build the Walkure AVR hub to gather data on an RS485 network. I then need to build Nibelungen devices to communicate with the hub. The hub output will be to a packet system. There is no hurry to purchase a Radio System until the hub and clients are implemented. This needs to be ASAP to accommodate the winter of 2009/10.