https://www.multitronix.com/ has non-ham solutions like Kate, but be prepared to spend some change.....
Kate is very reliable and works over 140 kft. and provides a real time data downlink, and has IMU backup IIRC.
You should not rely on any system that requires a cell phone network for tracking as you may not have cell coverage when you need it.
A ham radio system using APRS can be used provide that the prerequisite ham repeater network is available. It works really well as you can track it via the internet as well as via your own transceiver.
One comment on using APRS on the 2 meter band. First off, the national frequency on 144.390Mhz is where the "National" backbone is located and one would have to count on having digipeater/igate stations nearby in order to get the telemetered position packets placed on the APRS-IS network (
https://aprs.fi/). Secondly, if one does a high rate APRS tracking on 144.390 at one position packet every 5 seconds, which is just about the highest reliable refresh rate APRS can do (I've done once every 3 seconds using a trick only valid for ground testing), the APRS NAZIs will have a spasz attack due to "the imbecile who's clogging the national backbone". Hams don't like seeing high rate stuff on the national backbone as it clogs it up for use by the masses.
Yeah, one can juggle the PATH statement (WIDE2-1) to make sure the Rf packet doesn't get re-transmitted too many times but then again, must get the packet to a station that has an internet connection to get the packet on the -IS backbone so it can be "seen" on aprs.fi. Personally, I'm the only one interested in my flights so I use 70cm (no APRS-IS network available) or something other than 144.390Mhz so I wouldn't disturb the national backbone with
high rate reporting.
Thus it would be poor form to track a rocket on 144.390 at a high refresh rate. Now there are some propagation advantages to tracking on the ham bands that are more apparent and more likely advantageous for stupid high, stupid fast and stupid far
flight profiles. (Note well, not meant to be derogatory. It's only stupid if one attempts such flights in the wrong venue.) 900Mhz might not be the best albeit I believe Multitronix is probably as optimized as it can get in the 900Mhz bands judging by some of the flights they have documented going extremely high. If one wants to APRS track locally off 144.390Mhz, I don't think anyone cares what refresh rate is used. The high altitude balloon folks use the national network to their advantage if their balloon gets out of their local tracking receiver footprint. They use refresh rates of several minutes though and from 50,000 to 100,000 feet the coverage is so great that their packets are bound
to hit an IGATE that will get their position into aprs.fi. Plus they can choose their PATH statement so their position "doesn't" get re-transmitted several times by the ground station digipeaters via Rf on 144.390Mhz.
One can see the advantage there in that they could switch to a cellphone internet service and track their balloon via aprs.fi if it's out of range of their receiver. Of course as long as they have internet service!
Greg Clark has 70cm and 2 meter APRS trackers in high and low powered models. Keep in mind with higher power, the battery and size requirement is greater. There are other concerns like Byonics that caters to the do-it-yourselfer and the Sainsonic
AP510 which is about the cheapest but has a very high learning curve. The 510 has a GPS chipset (Sirf III or IV depending what's printed) that is optimized for terrestrial use and will help one find their rocket but not good to rely on for altitude reporting.
That said I've had correspondence from those who have flown an AP510 next to a BeelineGPS tracker (the BLGPS is approved for TRA record attempts mind you) in a high altitude balloon and the altitudes corresponded very closely. Me thinks the
SIRF III or IV is not good for altitude reporting in the high dynamic state of a rocket launch/flight. A slow, sedate balloon and it's not so bad. To simply find a rocket, SIRF III or IV will work as long as the chipset continues to report at altitude.
If one wants power comparisons, John Coker's site:
https://www.jcrocket.com/gps-tracking.shtml has a good reference though is doesn't take into account the newer GPS trackers. The information on power output still stands well. Be aware if one moves towards >100mW power, must be absolutely certain that the tracker doesn't interfere with the deployment electronics. The newer deployment devices like anything by EggTimer or altimeters with opto-isolators on the output circuits are resistant to
Rf. Anything like pad deployment of the charges or shutdown of the electronics leading to a ballistic flight can be had if one is not careful. Kurt