On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 9:24 PM Jeroen Vreeken <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> 52bits per 30ms might work out nicely.
>
> 30ms at 2400baud is 72 bits. If we use a 16 bit uw there are still 4
> bits to spare.
> I don't think FEC is that important when using an existing FM system.
> For more advanced work with TDMA that will help, but I think that would
> require its own format and mode anyway, no need to mix those two up.
> (Execpt use the same codec2 mode for convenience)
>
> I think the code changes for such a mode would be relativly simple.
> fmfsk is currently fixed at 96 bits per frame, but that can be fixed
> relativly easy and a new frame format should be easy to add. (Basicly
> its size is between the 800XA and 2400A/B)

Given how good JM's 1600 bps codec sounds, I would be surprised if
adding more bits to the codec instead of FEC were a good trade-off.

Keep in mind FEC can also be used to help recover timing, train
equalization, and monitor signal error levels.

For digital voice for HAM FM I think the major accomplishment would be
sounding better than NFM under common good conditions, while achieving
usable copy in the presence of worse multipath and interference. Under
that line of thinking driving bitrate out of the codec is useful
specifically because it allows adding more FEC.

Are there really many places where spectral efficiency is actually
important for VHF+ ham communications?   It was my impression that ham
DV systems were pushing on spectral efficiency only because of being
receiving commercial system hand-me-downs.

(and even on the commercial trunked radio systems, I wonder how much
of the pressure for increased spectral efficiency comes from an actual
need for additional capacity vs what differentiators someone could
stuff on an RFP-- certainly when I worked on a muni digital trunked
radio system RFP process twenty years ago we liked the additional
capacity but didn't actually have a really clear need for it, and
today the trunked radio system in the municipality I live in is pretty
lightly loaded)

If anything, I think switching to modes that transmitted two
relatively narrow signals 100KHz apart coding the same data (perhaps
randomly permuted for better temporal gains) in order to get more
multipath diversity would make more sense than striving for the
narrowest signal.


_______________________________________________
Freetel-codec2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2

Reply via email to