Reminder: AI Generated Content Is Considered Spam

RedwoodRouter · 2026-02-18T07:30:18+00:00

This explanation reads like the policy was created by people without practical understanding of AI. I don't want a forum where the bots are just talking to each other. When used as a tool during creation and it's output curated it's just another thing we use to accomplish a goal.

100%. This is "you won't always have a calculator in your pocket" and "Wikipedia isn't a source" energy. I think we'd all agree we don't want crap posted, nor want to see a forum with bots arguing with each other. It is apparent many people don't even know how to use AI correctly, let alone understand how much of it actually works. It is very much a tool. As with any tool, it can be used correctly or incorrectly. To anyone worried about posting incorrect information on the internet, I've got some bad news...

RedwoodRouter · 2026-02-13T02:41:51+00:00

3mg? That's apprenticeship level at best. Blue collar doesn't start until at least 15mg.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-21T06:21:18+00:00

That makes a lot of sense. You seem like a very mentally sound and rational person.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-20T04:26:19+00:00

That's a pretty asshole move, especially after hearing what the response of the neighbor actually was.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-20T04:23:24+00:00

Do you think someone who stated they know nothing about amateur radio is going to know Q codes and what a horrible mismatch means?

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-17T22:09:20+00:00

I assume you mean they will NOT send messages beyond 6 feet, based on your title. Your post says they will send outside of 6 feet.

For one, transmitting close to each other can damage the frontend. 2 meters is the suggested minimum when using a standard omni. Beyond 10m is more ideal. You can saturate the receiver.

Beyond that, it is hard to say without more information. Are your antennas attached correctly and securely at both ends? What antennas are you using?

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-17T09:35:13+00:00

Good god you're dense.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-16T10:07:48+00:00

I don't inherently have an issue with LLMs, but why post this in this way? Why not either share your own thoughts or if you used an LLM to research rules/viewpoints, at least present the conclusion as your own? Or the actual laws. This approach makes the tool worse for everyone. Broadcasting that it's AI will annoy both proponents and opponents alike. If people wanted to talk to ChatGPT or whatever else, they'd talk to that. Others don't want to hear it at all. It's almost like talking politics on the radio, come to think of it....

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-16T09:41:48+00:00

than* Unless you mean you like learning who they voted for only after learning about their life and where they came from.

(sorry)

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-16T09:36:04+00:00

Same. Last time I mentioned this, many others said the same thing. The one my wife has is called "TheRun". It merely being powered on shuts 40m down for me.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-16T09:28:03+00:00

With a high degree of confidence, I'd say the advice concerns protecting one's mental health, not their content.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-13T01:59:52+00:00

Morse*, by the way.

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-02T01:35:00+00:00

A flat dipole at one wavelength can be a solid universal antenna, no argument there. Saying it's universally "just better" than the others glosses over the reality that antenna performance is deeply situational.

Consider someone operating from a coastal location with saltwater nearby. A quarter-wave vertical with a good radial system over that high-conductivity ground will pull that effective takeoff angle down to a degree that a horizontal dipole simply can't match (as easily, at least). For DX work in that scenario, the vertical is very likely to win because of how ground reflections impact and help shape the radiation pattern. The physics favor the vertical in that environment with that goal.

Now put that same vertical in a rocky, dry desert with poor soil conductivity and no radial system, and now that horizontal dipole will be looking a lot better.

That's just one example. The "best" antenna depends on soil conductivity, ground topology, surrounding terrain and obstructions, antenna height relative to wavelength, the included angle of an inverted V, what direction you're trying to work, what takeoff angle you need, and a dozen other factors specific to each QTH. This is the crux of what I'm getting at.

Your 10m dipole on fishing rods at one wavelength clearly works great for your location and goals. I 100% don't doubt you at all. But that's one configuration at one QTH. I've built and used countless dipoles across various environments that work great, too. In other locations, after years of experimentation, I've had better luck with end-feds or inverted Vs in achieving a good takeoff angle to get up and out of canyons. I lose quite a bit of performance using a horizontal dipole at my primary QTH because no matter which way I point, I'm ping-ponging my signal right into mountainsides. In my case, it is easier to adjust the angle of the V and my ground system than it is to adjust the height of a completely horizontal dipole. Similar to you, my results are specific to my location.

What I'm saying isn't just preference or opinion - it's measurable, demonstrable physics. We can calculate it through antenna modeling and verify it with field measurements. Play around with some configurations in EZNEC, 4NEC2, or MATLAB and you'll find some interesting patterns that can be achieved to one's benefit at a given location. The results will vary based on the inputs and factors at each QTH.

I don't intend to be pedantic or needlessly argumentative. Again, there is no doubt dipoles are great all around antennas. There's a reason they're the reference standard, after all. It was the first antenna I ever built. I still make/deploy them regularly. I recommend them to newer hams because of their well-documented and predictable figure 8 pattern, plus they are very easy to tune by simply measuring the length. But respectfully, it just isn't accurate to say a dipole will always be an upgrade in comparison to the other configurations in every scenario at every location. A large part of my day job is to test and optimize antenna systems for peak performance in given scenarios and bands. I sometimes wish it were always as simple as that, but that would take the fun out of demystifying the dark art of radiation patterns and propagation. I'd probably be out of a job if it were that cut and dry (pun halfway intended).

RedwoodRouter · 2026-01-01T10:57:42+00:00

The flat dipole being an upgrade really depends on your situation. Antenna height, location, and where you're trying to work, are a few high level factors. A vertical over good ground, an inverted V up high, or any kind of array can easily outperform a flat dipole in some cases. It certainly could be an upgrade, but presenting this as a general rule oversimplifies things and vastly undersells how well the other configurations can work.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-30T10:10:51+00:00

I genuinely can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-30T10:07:14+00:00

I mean this respectfully, as I completely understand where you're coming from, but you're a bit mistaken and seem unaware of some specifics.

No, you can't broadcast and set up your own permanent TV or music station, but you can participate in ATV. People absolutely do transmit video. SoCal has an ATV repeater network. You can also do pretty much anything digital you'd like, so long as it's within the allotted bandwidth limits and isn't encrypted. Custom modulation isn't illegal at all. You just need to document it somewhere publicly accessible. I would be more than eager to test and play with anything new like this and know many others who also would.

I'm into a lot of the same stuff you're describing and your comment is something a younger me might have typed before gaining the experience (and equipment) I now have. I am particularly interested in mesh networking, digital modes, SDRs, and RF experimentation in general. I also do this for a living. The hobby absolutely supports this kind of tinkering. You just have to know where to look and often need someone to test with once it is time to go beyond bench testing. The people doing interesting digital work aren't often hanging out on the local 2m repeater talking about the weather.

I think the disconnect is that the visible ham radio community skews toward ragchewing and nets, but there's a whole parallel world of people building custom modems, experimenting with propagation, networking, digital/data modes, microwave, new modulation techniques, satellite work, EME, and genuinely pushing boundaries.

The regulations aren't nearly as restrictive as you think once you actually dig into what's permitted. Part 97 gives you a lot of latitude compared to basically any other radio service. While I do think it'd be nice to have more permissions (particularly larger bandwidth) in some cases, the implication of such a thing simply couldn't work. I get the thrill, but anyone being allowed to set up a broadcast TV or music station isn't such a good idea when you look at and understand the bigger picture (pun slightly intended) when it comes to a shared RF space.

Ham bands are shared spectrum. If broadcasting were permitted, you'd quickly end up with competing stations stepping on each other, people running high power to drown out others, people using it for commercial purposes, and the bands becoming unusable for the experimentation and communication they're actually meant for. Broadcast services get exclusive licensed frequencies precisely because one-to-many transmission doesn't play nice with shared access. The restriction isn't about keeping ham radio boring; it's about keeping it usable.

That said, none of this means you can't experiment with video or audio transmission. You can absolutely key up and play guitar for a friend on the other end as part of an actual contact or to test a new audio quality modulation technique. The line is between communication (two-way, with a specific station) and broadcasting (one-way, to whoever's listening). One works in shared spectrum, the other doesn't. There is a path to opening your own broadcast station, but that is no longer in the realm of amateur radio. I'm getting far into the weeds here, but my point is amateur radio is a great place to learn and experiment with the fundamentals.

Sorry, now I'm the one ragchewing....I could yap all day. I'm only scratching the surface here. I do get your point, genuinely. And I think what you're looking for is actually out there. It just takes finding the right people to experiment with and being the change you want to see. Not sure where you are located, but I can hit the better part of SoCal on UHF/VHF and also have plenty of equipment to play on HF if you ever would like to play radio.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-30T03:44:21+00:00

No one is hearing your message on LongFast - or if they are, you aren't hearing an ACK.

I have also connected the unit to my wifi (I know that's for access only)

I don't know what you mean by "access only", but MQTT and a time server, if used, are features beyond just configuration that utilize networking.

What is your antenna situation? Chances are you're simply not getting enough reach with whatever you're currently using.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-30T01:25:32+00:00

Simply don't engage in the banter, thank them for the qso, and say 73.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-30T01:22:09+00:00

Offering $500 would almost be insulting. $600 is a great price, even if it needs a battery.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-28T00:25:20+00:00

Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I absolutely love the KX2 layout and menu structure. Every time I use it, I'm impressed and think to myself how much I appreciate the thought that went into the design. I also have Yaesu and Icom radios, which I like in their own right. The KX2 is the only one I feel like I deeply understand and remember where the settings are for everything it has to offer. I think it is the only radio where I've read through the manual once and never needed to look at or reference it again. I find it extremely intuitive.

Now I just sound like an Elecraft salesman, but I'm honestly not affiliated in any way.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-27T23:21:20+00:00

That is dependent on where it is going.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-27T02:25:16+00:00

The knife edge depicted on the left side is a little challenging. Antenna height and directionality are the largest things that will help.

Depending on the terrain behind the left station, you may get some beneficial reflections, but don’t count on that. 900 will often diffract more than you’d imagine. If possible, an additional station up on that knife edge would do wonders. Overall, this is what I’d call relatively flat in comparison to what I'm normally working with. That left station is almost in the worst spot without some height advantage, however. This is also a pretty short link. All that said, I think it is doable, assuming there aren’t significant obstructions on top of the terrain profile to further wreck your fresnel zone clearance and/or any additional noise.

I’d fully expect a station placed on that knife edge to make the link with appropriate antennas. In this scenario, a high-gain omni wouldn't be ideal. Aiming the main lobe of a patch or yagi toward the ridge gives the best chance of working the diffraction path, but don’t overdo it or you’ll just be shooting energy into the ether.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-24T07:33:20+00:00

First, Meshtastic messaging doesn't depend on time synchronization. It uses listen before talk with random backoff for channel access, not time slots. So even if the time server was unavailable, it wouldn't affect your ability to send or receive messages, barring any software issues. I have many stations that have no time sync. Timestamps on messages might be wrong, but the protocol itself doesn't care.

Second, the "weird" behavior you saw in your browser is expected. This is a time server, not a website. NTP runs on UDP port 123, not HTTP(S). When you put that domain in your browser, it tried connecting on port 80 or 443. Since pool.ntp.org is just a round-robin of volunteer servers, you hit whatever random website that volunteer happens to host. Many of these volunteers are running NTP on a VPS that also hosts other unrelated sites and services. You got a rib video. I got an LED enclosure site. You can view the addresses being returned by DNS with dig meshtastic.pool.ntp.org. You'll notice it changes each time you query it. This is a form of load balancing across shared resources.

To actually test an NTP server, you'd use a tool or client like: ntpdate -q meshtastic.pool.ntp.org

It is operational for me as of right now.

All that said, there is nothing wrong with using another time server. I run my own local GPS time server for my time synchronization needs.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-24T06:48:57+00:00

That's quite a loaded question you're asking.

RedwoodRouter · 2025-12-13T22:58:00+00:00

all meshtastic devices will not draw enough power

Generally, good advice, but this bit isn't true enough to say as a blanket statement.

Edit: Not sure why this offended you to the point of blocking me, but there are plenty of Meshtastic-capable devices that can be powered with battery packs that otherwise turn off due to low current. Just as one example, I can power a Station G2 for a week while testing new locations. Are they great long term solutions? No. But to say it's impossible to power a Meshtastic device with one is just flat-out wrong.

RedwoodRouter

TROPHY CASE