I'm glad to hear that. It sounds like it's implemented the "obvious" way, and thus should be very easy to duplicate. I'll try to set up a test harness and see whether I can duplicate its functionality.
If I do, I'll report success here. On 9/19/07, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To the best of my recollection, any signals within the passband would > prevent a transmission. Even fleeting ones like voice SSB, but it was > not as affected by wide band noise as much, even static crashes. I don't > know if it was more than what you ask, but I will say that most > reasonable hams would be quite impressed with the ability to not > transmit except on a clear frequency. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U > > > Robert Thompson wrote: > > > > Specifically, if someone was already holding a SSB QSO (one of the > > more difficult "standard" cases), would it successfully hold off until > > they abandoned the frequency before initiating its own traffic? It's > > well known that modes that concentrate their energy into a relatively > > narrow bandwidth are easy to detect compared to "noise-distribution" > > modes. SSB is somewhat difficult, as it tends to spread the energy in > > a way that tends not to "peak" when integrated over a one or two > > second window. What I'm trying to find out is if the algorithm was > > just a standard windowed fft (with possibly a few flourishes like > > automatic thresholding) or whether it was something fundamentally new. > > >
