Rick, Performance compared to other modes:
In terms of throughput on low power (5 watts) NVIS path tested on 80M and 5MHz, RFSM2400 (nonstandard, 2.7 KHz) was faster than PSK125 and allways completed the session. PSK63 was difficult due to tight frequency tolerance (despite commercial spec. gear). The 3KHz hamDrm (50 watts) was not reliable. I have not tried WSJT modes, undoubtedley they will get through noisy bands better but will they deliver the speed? This will allways be a compromise, the most adaptable mode will win. In terms of functionality of the protocols: RFSM2400 by far the simplest to set up and operate. It does support com port ptt control, Also would probably work VOX radios ok. The project I'm working on requires robustness and automatic recovery for power loss etc. at the server, minimum throughput around whats achievable now (PSK125 rates) and no proprietary hardware to buy. That cuts Pactor3 out of the choices. My tests with PSKmail have slowed somewhat with the changeover to fldigi and the extra bells & whistles that have prevented me getting a stable reliable distro to run. We have had successful sessions but the difficulty of monitoring the status of the connection is a factor that makes it less suitable for the role. It does what its designed for well, and I'd use it if I had an RV (assuming I can't get RFSM2400 to provide the same functions). Using a linux PC is no problem, I just got a small HD and swapped out the existing HD. I have not been able to set it up to completely autostart and operate, though, which RFSM2400 does. I also use an autoanswer SKYPE on the same PC, for remote radio monitoring, and that co-exists with the same soundcard as RFSM2400 without problems. Ralph --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ralph, > > Could you be a bit more specific when you say that you are having good > results? > > How does RFSM2400 compare with other digital modes, particularly in > terms of weak signal performance? And also with high noise levels such > as on the lower bands? > > > Although I don't have any convenient way of trying out RFSM2400 since I > only use software that supports CI-V or RS-232 rig control, (ICOM does > not permit VOX control from the rear connector), are there any U.S. hams > finding superior results compared with other modes?
