I recently read an article about DSTAR and was surprised to find that this form of communication is still in it’s adolescent form. Supported by Icom, DSTAR adds a considerable expense to the cost of their HT’s.
DSTAR not only requires knowledge of the receiving station but the operator also requires knowledge of all “network hops” between the source and destination to complete the circuit. So that means if you are on travel, you would have to know the hops between your location and the destination at each and every place that you visit.
It seems the systems designers missed the boat and should have looked at the success of existing systems (like the Internet) to have eliminated this connection requirement. All systems do take time to mature, but this is a miss by a mile as far as I see it!
I’d like to know if there is a reason for this design methodology. With the exception of system flexibility at the expense of the operator, I see this as a fundamental flaw. If anyone would care to comment further about my possible misunderstanding or plain old “lack of knowledge” about this subject, feel free to comment.
However, even though this system lack operator “friendliness” there are many systems in the US and the World that support DSTAR and the DSTAR system locator link below is designed to point these systems out to you. I did not take the time to dig into the routing information, but perhaps one or more of the links I supplied will help with that information as well.
Why not comment on your experience with DSTAR and it’s capabilities?