--- Patrick Lindecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jose, some questions, > > * for Pactor, why do you need a so precise timing It > seems that you need a 1/100,000 precision or better. > This because the RX Pactor modem follows an exact > timing from the beginning of the QSO (after a first > signal synchrization). In other words, is there any > possibility for the RX Pactor modem to take into > account a drift (due to a not very precise PC > cristal, or due to the Windows uncertainty) by > simply synchronizing on the signal?
Well, there are a few things I don't remember precisely, as I used TERMAN93 many years ago. It did not take drift onto account. If I remember well, it requires 20 ppm or better, it is the protocol specification that the hardware controller follows. > * I see in the protocol that the Master > automatically test the 200 bauds speed with a CS4 > signal. Is it systematic and independant from the > user, or is it a user request? In the original protocol, the hardware controller does it it is automatically. In the TERMAN93 solution, it is done by operator request. Guess it was something yet not known about the protocol structure, that did not hinder the core program from working. > * may you confirm that you integer the Pactor > protocol in your soft? TERMAN93 was written for DOS by Thomas Sailer, HB9JNX. He is the author of HF, the terminal for Linux. There is a copy of the software that includes a manual in: Mirrors for terman93.zip (95.11 KB): 1998-04-30 ftp://64.34.174.35/software_lib/an93/terman93.zip I believe it might be advisable that you read its manual. > * which will be the best for a test under Windows > (in a far future!), between Amtor and Pactor? I believe it would be preferable to aim at Pactor. Nevertheless, Pactor II and Pactor III are so much better... > * is there the same problem of very precise timing > for Amtor ARQ? I don't remember well, I aimed at the better solution then....Pactor. AMTOR worked, but I was not really interested on it. > * how do you manage the RX/TX switch? The time to > switch the TX is not equal to 0 ms and you must take > the switching time into account very precisely, > don't you? Does this switching time vary a lot (in > "ms" scale)? The software has variables to do that. Here goes an excerpt from the manual: ################################################### A.11. Section [PACTOR] ---------------------- RxAfterTx=50 This value determines how many milliseconds the software should wait before starting to send in the SLAVE mode. For DX, set it to TxDelay. If you want to do a short range QSO, set it to about 50. You can leave it quite high, since Pactor has a LongPath mode for DX operation. TxDelay=50 This is the number of milliseconds your transceiver needs to key up ##################################################### 73 de Jose, CO2JA __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
