io@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
Packet COULD have been a solution, but had a
modulation format unable to do the job.
As a MultiPSK user, I think that PSK31 is inadequate,
maybe PSKFEC could perform better, but I would try
PAX.
It has some long keyin
Packet COULD have been a solution, but had a
modulation format unable to do the job.
As a MultiPSK user, I think that PSK31 is inadequate,
maybe PSKFEC could perform better, but I would try
PAX.
It has some long keying delays I don't like from the
moment you press the ENTER key, but is an ARQ
nt to go there.
Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:10 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
Walt,
I don't doubt that the source da
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 5:19 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
Walt-
All that is fine, but, unless I am badly off base, your examples are all
voice Comms, not digital. I can support that 100%. Or did I
y by the research organization.
Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 3:04 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
Jose Amador wrote:
> Taking advent
That kind of doubt should always be the first
consideration in data transmission.
Some 9 years ago I had a request for a project that
never materialized, because the "client" wanted to
transmit several raw, uncompressed data base files to
a central office, subtituting a "floppy mail"
transfer, a
TED]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:14 PM
>To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
>
>
>
>Walt- I will agree that this is a desirable capability, and I will agree
>that Hams should *Within reason* provide emergency Comms, but
Walt,
I don't doubt that the source data is 20K/Minute or greater, what I
question is whether or not sending the 'source' is necessary? It seems
to me that you are asking us to find ways to solve a problem, it often
helps to step back and look at the problem and ask questions. I make my
livi
Jose Amador wrote:
> Taking adventage of SCS experience, they chose PSK
> (cannot tell by heart if differential or not, a peek
> to the manual is needed) as a modem, and depending on
> the retry rate (closely related to BER) it tries more
> complex constellations and more carriers. One of the
> "se
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 2:37 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
You say "A highspeed, error free, robust, realtime, HF data mode is
needed." Why would the radar images have to be digital? It's no
--- KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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
> frequenci
MIL-STD 188-141 http://tracebase.nmsu.edu/hf/standards/MIL/141Bn1.pdf .
MIL-STD 188-110 http://tracebase.nmsu.edu/hf/standards/MIL/188-110B.pdf
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themi
You say "A highspeed, error free, robust, realtime, HF data mode is
needed." Why would the radar images have to be digital? It's not
perfect data, but continuously changing. When I view radar and
satellite imagery of storms on my television set, the signal I receive
isn't digital, and it doe
--- DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
> st
--- Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >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?
On the contrary, it is worse on the LOWER bands.
> I think this limit only applies to protocols that do
> not
--- DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok Jose and everyone...let's take a poll or have
> some SWAGs.
>
> So what do YOU (plural) think is the best modulation
> technique to use for a NEW and BETTER HF data mode?
I believe there is no single best mode. Like in
antennas
PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
Walt- I will agree that this is a desirable capability, and I will agree
that Hams should *Within reason* provide emergency Comms, but I DO NOT see
this scenario as a proper part of Ham service. Especially
Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:25 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
You are misinterpreting what I was asking. Probably because I did a
I have been looking through the internet to find more information on all
these alphabet soup modems. Here is a very interesting web site that
lists not only the various types of waveform bps rates, but also the S/N
ratio for these modems to work properly. Unfortunately, the baud rate is
never m
Rick,
The modem used with MIL-STD 188-141 is 8FSK running at 125 baud, one tone
at a time, 3 bits per symbol. MIL-STD 188-110 uses 8PSK at 2400 baud, one
tone at a time, 3 bits per symbol.
73,
Mark N5RFX
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of int
Walt- I will agree that this is a desirable capability, and I will agree
that Hams should *Within reason* provide emergency Comms, but I DO NOT see
this scenario as a proper part of Ham service. Especially if it requires
drastic changes in our service constraints.
Really- this is an extreme cas
-
>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
--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 bau
>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,
Thanks for your comments, Jose, however, I think most of us understand
and agree with what you say.
What I am not clear on is the difference betwee the differential
versions of the PSK modes and the non-differential versions. For
example, my understanding is that PSK31 is really DBPSK31. I thin
Walt/K5YFW
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 8:28 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] 16QPSK Modulation and Baud
--- KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Walt,
>
>
--- KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Walt,
>
> Maybe someone can clear this up, but what is the
> difference between the
> differential modes such as DBPSK, DQPSK, 8DPSK, and
> 16DPSK such as used
> with Pactor 2 and modes such as 8QPSK, 16QPSK?
Even when theory says that differential modes
Walt,
Maybe someone can clear this up, but what is the difference between the
differential modes such as DBPSK, DQPSK, 8DPSK, and 16DPSK such as used
with Pactor 2 and modes such as 8QPSK, 16QPSK?
With the former, it is my understanding that with a single tone, the
binary form (DBPSK) gives yo
--- DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greeings All,
>
> How hard is it to demodulate a 16QPSK as compaired
> to a 8QPSK signal.
Demodulation...I think it is about the same. Carrier
regeneration is a bit more complex. Decoding it is
something else, but also doable.
> A
29 matches
Mail list logo