You are misinterpreting what I was asking. Probably because I did a poor explanation.
What I am asking, and no one seems to confirm, is whether or not the MIL or STANAG modems really are running at multi thousand baud rates on HF frequencies, or whether they are adding up the individual baud rates of the tones and claiming that as the baud rate? As an example, the Clover II waveform has four tones that operate at 31.25 baud. The total speed of the protocol varies depending upon which modulation scheme is being used at a given time. It can vary from 2DPSM to 16PSM with an extra 4ASM. Only one tone is operating at a given time. Thus the claim that the baud rate is always 31.25. With parallel tone modems do you have something similar, but there are many tones operating at the same time but perhaps at a moderate baud rate? Then do you add up the baud rates of each tone to total the waveform baud rate? Is that how they come up with using multi thousand baud rates on HF? Or are MIL and STANAG modems running multi thousand baud rates for a given tone? 73, Rick, KV9U DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote: >Let me give one incident where high through put would be most desirable... > >When hurricanes hit the Texas Gulf Coast, all but radio communications can be >lost between Brownsville, Texas to Houston, Texas. The weather stations there >may have their eather radars operational but unable to send the "picture" or >data to other weather stations. A highspeed, error free, robust, realtime, HF >data mode is needed. The radar information may be 7.50 K bytes or larger. >This data would need to be repeated every 5-10 minutes during critial stages >of a hurricane. > >Walt/K5YFW > >-----Original Message----- >From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:38 AM >To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud > > > > > >>Can you or anyone explain why they need this high speed on HF when even >>300 baud is pushing the limit on the higher HF bands? >> >> > >I think this limit only applies to protocols that do not make use of FEC, >redundancy and >adaptive training. Adaptive training may be the most important element. > >73, > >Mark N5RFX > > > > 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/
