I suspect I know what you're thinking of :)... probably the same thing I was thinking of when I read the Order: A digitized voice mode where the transmit channel data rate is sufficient for transmitting at least twice what is required for the compressed voice; packetizing the voice into something that requires less than half of the available bandwidth, an having a "non-repeater" re-transmit the signal in the intervals between the packets it receives. Setting a 'has been retransmitted' bit in the packet would prevent double packets messing things up on receive if the receiver hears both signals.
Sounds like fun. Or, if that wasn't what you were thinking of, sounds like there may even be *more* fun out there. 73, Paul / K9PS expeditionradio wrote: > The FCC recently posted on Order clarifying > what it believes a repeater is. > > Due to the "law of unintended consequences", > while this recent FCC order closes one > small perceived loophole for D-Star and > P-25 signals, it simultaneously (pun intended) > affirms something else... the existence of > an opportunity for other type(s) of digital > voice relay systems that will absolutely not > be considered "repeaters" by FCC! > > I'm not going to spill the beans on exactly > what RF digital methods or other techniques > this speaks to, but it has far-reaching > ramifications for wonderful new developments > in ham technology on HF/VHF/UHF. > > I will say that I'm quite gleefully watching > what happens next... this is going to be fun! > > 73 Bonnie VR2/KQ6XA >
