It's been a while since I did a state-wide update, and there have been a few exciting developments lately.
Near Mankato, WX0MIK-1 appeared on-air this weekend (1/11/25). While it's still very new, it has the potential to bring big improvements in coverage and messaging capability to southern Minnesota. From what I can tell from the public info, it's a TX gateway on a very good site. This provides an alternate path to gateway for the big Mankato digipeater (N0PBA-1), and WX0MIK-1 can obviously leverage that big digipeater to provide RF-based messaging and services to a wide area. From an expansion perspective, WX0MIK-1 could potentially provide a reliable path to gateway for new small-scale digipeaters in New Ulm or Blue Earth County. Mankato itself has enough local traffic to justify its own gateway, so this development is long overdue. There's no need to send all of the area's traffic to Faribault to be gated.
 |
| Mankato area infrastructure |
In the south-west, KD0BXJ-3 has returned to service after years as an -IS station. While it claims to be a TX gateway, KD0BXJ-3 has not seen any RF transmissions gated. It seems to be functioning as an RX-only i-Gate, and it's badly needed in that area.
Moving northwards, the NY0I-2 digipeater in Granite Falls has lost RX. It still transmits an RF beacon, but it no longer hears any traffic. This is a fairly common issue with digipeaters, especially those that run UIDIGI as the TNC/client. I've notified the operator (Dean), and I'm hopeful this will be resolved in the coming weeks.
A new RX-only gateway has appeared south of Fergus Falls. K0TML-10 is a bit unstable, but has managed to gate packets. It's too early to tell anything about coverage, and the station may not stick around. Other promising gateways in the north-central area have disappeared after a month or so. A TX gateway is what is really needed around Fergus Falls. Now that the Battle Lake digipeater KC0ZZQ-5 is stable, there's a great opportunity to leverage that with a nearby gateway to provide messaging and services to a wide area. But an RX-only gateway is still a step forward if it can provide coverage for motorists on I-94.
EDIT: Wow, that didn't last long. K0TML-10 is already off-air.
K0VSC-2 existed for a few weeks near Detroit Lakes, but has now faded away. This was a promising TX gateway/digi, run by the same operator who handles the massive K0VSC-1 gateway north-west of St. Cloud. Toward the end of 2024, there were signs of expansion in the north-central MN infrastructure, but little actually panned out ot be permanent.
The digipeater in Mahtowa (MHTOWA) has been off-air for weeks. This is about midway between Moose Lake and Cloquet along I-35. This leaves quite a long stretch of I-35 without reliable coverage. I've notified the operator, but have received no response yet.
Just after Christmas, KC0KUR-10 came back on-air after months. This TX gateway is located north of Chisago City, and it covers that peculiar gap between I-35 and the Wisconsin border quite well. Aside from providing solid coverage of 1-35 up to Rush City, it also reaches into Anoka and Isanti Counties to offer scattered fill-in coverage to areas without even baseline coverage from the network.
 |
| KC0KUR-10 direct coverage |
In that same area, there's been another surprising development: the return of ISANTI.
Once upon a time, ISANTI operated as a digipeater run by KC0WKP... near Isanti. It was part of the WINET (Wisconsin) digipeater network, though it was in Minnesota. ISANTI offered some baseline coverage to the rural areas north of the metro, but always lacked a solid path to gateway -- especially a TX gateway.
However, ISANTI came on-air this weekend (1/11/25) as a TX gateway. Not sure if it has any digipeater capability. It's still early innings, but the station is already hearing the big metro digipeaters (W0PZT-1 and K0YTH-13) and is gating packets from stations around Cambridge. It's a very nice supplement to the RX-only gateway WB0VGI-1 just north of North Branch along I-35. ISANTI can supply the TX for whatever messaging traffic WB0VGI-1 picks up.
At this point, a decent digipeater in Princeton could create a solid RF link between St. Cloud and the Wisconsin border by using this new gateway.
ISANTI is not listed on the WINET site as a sponsored station. That WINET site is laughably out-of-date, however. It took years for WINET to finally take ISANTI off the list as an active digipeater in the past. WINET shows an active digipeater in River Falls (WB0MPE-10), though that went off-air at least five years ago. And N0HOY-11 still shows as active, though it went off-air months ago.
KC0WKP implies a connection with WINET in the comment text, but WINET seems to demand that everything in its "sponsored network" runs on UIDIGI V.1.9B3. The ISANTI gateway uses the Microsat WX3in1 Plus 2.0, however. I'm not sure how UIDIGI gained a reputation as being remarkably stable and efficient. Also, consider that it hasn't been updated since 2007 (18 years ago!), and that it's designed to run on a MFJ-1274 device and burned on to an EEPROM. This hardly seems to be a pinnacle of human achievement. Still, one can find a WINET gateway in Madison, WI that is not actually running UIDIGI.
EDIT: I don't really have anything against UIDIGI, but I think it's an odd choice as a standard for a network. WINET can do whatever it wants on its network, but its network traffic is gated by non-sponsored stations. And, despite what their network claims, WINET has no functional gateways in its sponsored network.
Up on the Iron Range, the Ely/Cook/Virginia micro-network has been off-air for months. Sometimes, the Virginia digipeater will revive itself for a couple of weeks, but it seems to be largely abandoned. This is an excellent case study in why Big Solutions fail. A handful of small-scale home stations would be more reliable, and insisting on big remote stations has produced a situation that satisfies no one. Not only is it a big disappointment, but it sends a message to other potential operators that digipeaters are tricky, complicated things that require constant attention.
Summary
A few promising new elements of infrastructure have popped up lately, and other long-standing stations are experiencing difficulties. It's the same story as always. It remains to be seen if Minnesota can maintain a solid core of "enthusiastic individuals" to implement small-scale solutions: solar-powered digipeaters in cabins, basic gateways in the homes of relatives/friends, and simple TX home gateways within reach of digipeaters.
Hardware and software solutions are more abundant and cheaper than ever -- and also better-supported and more reliable.
No comments:
Post a Comment