Lonesome Stations

[readbueno]

IMHO, It is better to have stations slightly under-performing in the recording of strokes, rather than have them sending thousands of superfluous signals to the servers! 

Another possible option, might be, for the server to suspend or shut down these stations, and for an email to be sent to their owners, informing them that their station needs some attention!

Hi Brian,

I don't recall seeing any postings by Ergon, Tobi or other devs regarding the capacity/limitations of the network and that we should be limiting the number of signals sent? In fact I remember reading a post from Tobi to the contrary where he says he sets up his stations to be close to the threshold which generates a lot of signals and quote "he sends all that data to the server so it can sort it out".

If there are posts I stand corrected, however are you 100% sure that we should be limiting the quantity of signals sent, particularly as the system already has built-in safeguards that put a station into interference so that bulk signals are not sent.

If there are no such limitations, then the arguable aim of an operator should be to send as many real lightning signals in his area rather than worry about how "efficient" he is. I'd argue that its better for the network overall to have a system setup to send 100 real lightning strokes out of 10,000 signals "heard" than to send 10 stokes out of 100 signals in the same time period under the same conditions because the network receives 90 more lightning stokes it can potentially use. If the network/servers can handle the traffic, why limit your stations potential?

Cheers
Ian

Hi Ian, I have no problem with stations sending "Real Lightning Data!" However, how can you compare that to a station sending 90,000 signal+ per hour to the server with no recorded strokes.
You double posted this and I have replied more comprehensively in the other topic!
kindest regards,

Brian. 1856 Vilaboa.