Tony, Glad you are doing this! I have been thinking about using Contestia for MARS in conjunction with MT63 for messaging.
Unfortunately, I have one net to call tonight and one to checkin to, so will have to wait to see the results of your tests. Unless Conestia is especially good in other parameters, MFSK16 still holds a 1.5 dB edge in minimum S/N, and seems to work very well in heavy static, so it may turn out to be the best overall, but let's see. I used MultiPSk for my comparisons. Anxious to see what you find out! 73, Skip KH6TY http://kh6ty.home.comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Tony To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:14 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Contestia / MT63 Skeds pse All, Would like to run a few tests with Contestia (16/1K) and MT63 (1K) this evening. The goal is to see if sensitivity simulations compare well with on-air testing. Contestia should have an advantage since the peak-to-average output is much better. Not sure about it's QRM resistance. The MT63 mode is somewhat faster in terms of characters-per-minute, but it also has quite a bit of latency that adds to the total TX/RX turn around time. I tested both using a 100 word Pangram and found that MT63-1K (long interleave) took 50 seconds to finish the text and 61 seconds to complete. Contestia-16/1K took 64 seconds. The 8/1K Constestia mode took 43 seconds. Should be interesting to see how these modes compare. Not exactly lighting speed and not much call for this other than those who prefer high-speed chatting, but I think it's useful information nonetheless. I'll be QRV this evening - March 25/26. Skeds welcome.... Tony -K2MO
