RE: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital
Title: RE: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital Currently (according to my source(s)...U.S. and foreign contractors working for the DoD), Russia is using high-speed, robust digital modes on HF in addition to satellite communications. They are running at least 19.2 Kbps user throughput on 12 or 16 KHz channels and their modes will work down around -5 dB SNR with 99.9% accuracy. Also it is worth noting that they are using NVIS antennas even on their mobile units. Their basic base/portable NVIS antennas are not much more than multi-wire inverted Vs about 20 ft above ground with a number radials/counter-poise. One of their most popular lower throughput modems is a 96(?) tone OFDM type modem running in an 8 KHz channel width. Walt/K5YFW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of LELAND ZANTESON Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:58 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital Correct on the vulnerability of satellites. The Soviet military has relied on CW and one time pads for secure, simple and reliable communications. However it does cause one to be succinct. Lee W6FPO LELAND ZANTESON [EMAIL PROTECTED] Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital
I would be much more interested to learn what the Chinese
are up to in communications as they rush to build their
massive military bent on imperialistic conquest.
Are they relying only on satellites or are they, like the
Russian military, building redundant systems?
What I am seeing would make for a good Tom Clancy novel
where the most powerful military force on the earth is
suddenly and predictably neutered and lesser forces are
able to blackmail and/or annihalate the suddenly helpless
technology-dependent forces of the USA.
Perhaps Hams need to once again demonstrate the reliability
of alternative methods and to build a network upon which
at least some emergency communications may rely when the
ones they imagine to be reliable fail, again.
Not sure how we can help with the hyper-dependency of
the newest fighter jets and others on computers and
satellites. Don't know if they may even be flown if
EMP weapons take out their computers and/or the key
satellites are disabled. They could become billion
dollar relics in a moment and they will soon be replacing
less vulnerable craft.
Sigh ... well, it is a hobby so I suppose we can only
do what we can do and then nag our elected reps to take
a closer look at the rest!
doc
> Currently (according to my source(s)...U.S. and foreign contractors working
> for the DoD), Russia is using high-speed, robust digital modes on HF in
> addition to satellite communications. They are running at least 19.2 Kbps
> user throughput on 12 or 16 KHz channels and their modes will work down
> around -5 dB SNR with 99.9% accuracy. Also it is worth noting that they are
> using NVIS antennas even on their mobile units. Their basic base/portable
> NVIS antennas are not much more than multi-wire inverted Vs about 20 ft
> above ground with a number radials/counter-poise. One of their most popular
> lower throughput modems is a 96(?) tone OFDM type modem running in an 8 KHz
> channel width.
> Walt/K5YFW
--
~~
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
|_|___|_|
| | & | |
{|
/\ {|
/ \ {|
/\{|
/ @ \ {|
| |~_||
| -| ||
\ # http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html
KD4E =
West Central Florida
~~~
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation?
At this time, we do not have any really fast sound card modes available for amateur communication. Consider that: MT63 1K 1000 Hz wide 100 WPM -11 db MT63 2K 2000 Hz wide 200 WPM - 8 db MFSK16 340 Hz wide 40 WPM - 18 db Olivia 500 to 1000 Hz ~ 40 WPM similar weak signal to MFSK16, some claim better These numbers are only approximate depending on various sources/experiences, but give you a rough idea of relative comparisons. There are other factors e.g., ability to handle doppler flutter, interference, etc. Olivia can go wider and faster so should be able to approach or exceed 100 WPM with 8 tones at 2K. However, my experience with 8 tones suggested that it was not able to perform as well as MFSK16 on 80 meters under difficult conditions. And it would be tremendously wider. Part of that may be due to the baud rate as once you get above 50 baud, it becomes harder to get signals through under difficult conditions. What would be nice is if we could get some modes to move closer to 40 to 50 baud as their main signalling speed since this is well known as the best overall baud rate that will still work much of the time on HF. Another improvement would be the ability to fall back (or forward) to different speeds depending upon conditions. ARQ modes will make it possible to connect to various store and forward systems so that nets do not have to be in real time and will allow for the most convenient times for the operator. I have never quite understood why we can not have amateur modes that are similar in speed to the proprietary commercial modes other than the ability to switch back and forth as rapidly. And now that SCAMP has proven that switching speed is not needed for pipelined ARQ modes, it seems that it could be done. 73, Rick, KV9U DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote: > My ONLY digital operation now is a weekly net of about 30 minutes > which has been on MT63 on 40. We basically copy the NCS and list our > traffic. Then the NCS has us transmit the traffic. If the intended > recipient cannot copy the traffic, someone will relay it for you. > Almost all of us capture any traffic (which are files) sent on the net > in case someone needs a relay. Additionally there is some traffic > that is a broadcast to all stations. > > Thus far MT63 (2K long interleave) has been very robust but not as > fast as we would like. Most stations are running 100 SSB transceivers > and a NVIS antenna. > > The question is would MFSK16 or PSK63 be a better mode to run the net > on and then just pass the traffic on MT63? Also, are any of the above > modes more robust than MT63 and not too much slower (lower throughput)? > > Thanks and 73, > > Walt/K5YFW > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] New client for PSKmail is ready for download
Chat mode is now also available for PSKmail... The archive (PSKmail_client-0.2.0.tar.gz) can be downloaded at http://sharon.esrac.ele.tue.nl/pub/linux/ham/pskmail The new client features: * ARQ full duplex chat (client-to-client) mode (0% errors) * APRS messaging and posit * 63 Hz (3dB) bandwidth, therefore power efficient (BPSK) * max. 6 cps (= 72 wpm) one-way speed incl. overhead * block size dynamically adapts to changing conditions (QRN/QRM) + POP and SMTP to your own ISP (text) + Web site (text) download More info on http://pskmail.wikispaces.com 73, Rein PA0R Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[digitalradio] RE: Satellite vs HF Use by the U.S. Military
Title: RE: Satellite vs HF Use by the U.S. Military I thought this interesting. If you follow the related links back to Fed Biz Ops (www.fbo.gov) you will find that this is a solicitation for commercial satellite equipment. Army releases satcom RFP BY Frank Tiboni Published on Jan. 12, 2006 The Army issued a solicitation today for the five-year, $5 billion World-Wide Satellite Systems contract. The contract will provide a vehicle for the military and government agencies to buy commercial terminals and services for satellite communications. The Army will award as many as six indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity deals in late spring 2006, with the intent for two to go to small businesses. The six commercial satellite terminals offered on the contract are very small-aperture terminals (VSATs) for combat service support, flyaway VSATs, deployable satellite Earth terminals, fixed-station terminals, military-certified terminals and prime mover/trailer-mounted terminals. They might be required to operate with military or commercial satellites in the C-, Ku-, X- and Ka-bands. - See my comments below... Walt/K5YFW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of kd4e Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:02 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital I would be much more interested to learn what the Chinese are up to in communications as they rush to build their massive military bent on imperialistic conquest. I think that they are doing like the Russians...they are experimenting with a number of high-speed, robust, HF modes. -- k5yfw Are they relying only on satellites or are they, like the Russian military, building redundant systems? The Chinese DO have a couple of very hardened geo-sync. communications satellites that are used by their military as well as in commercial commerce. But I suspect that in a military situation, all the bandwidth would become military. -- k5yfw What I am seeing would make for a good Tom Clancy novel where the most powerful military force on the earth is suddenly and predictably neutered and lesser forces are able to blackmail and/or annihalate the suddenly helpless technology-dependent forces of the USA. It would be interesting and an eye opener for sure...but does Tom Clancy understand the problem any more than the general American public? The American public has to understand the problem before they will purchase the book. -- k5yfw Perhaps Hams need to once again demonstrate the reliability of alternative methods and to build a network upon which at least some emergency communications may rely when the ones they imagine to be reliable fail, again. Oh yes...that's what I have been saying for over 3 years now. First we need an inexpensive, high-speed, robust, HF data mode that can easily send information (messages) that can be routed to other stations. But before you can build a routed network, you need the mode and software to support you file transfer and routing. -- k5yfw Not sure how we can help with the hyper-dependency of the newest fighter jets and others on computers and satellites. Don't know if they may even be flown if EMP weapons take out their computers and/or the key satellites are disabled. They could become billion dollar relics in a moment and they will soon be replacing less vulnerable craft. OK... -- k5yfw Sigh ... well, it is a hobby so I suppose we can only do what we can do and then nag our elected reps to take a closer look at the rest! The only thing that we can hope is that programmers recognize the need and "build" the mode and that someone pushes the mode and need for a network. I have been hoping that the ARRL would do this; but the only thing they have done is recommend that we restrict bandwidth on HF to 3.5 KHz which will kill development of really high-speed, robust, HF modes such as the Russians and Chinese are building that use 8-20 KHz. -- k5yfw doc > Currently (according to my source(s)...U.S. and foreign contractors working > for the DoD), Russia is using high-speed, robust digital modes on HF in > addition to satellite communications. They are running at least 19.2 Kbps > user throughput on 12 or 16 KHz channels and their modes will work down > around -5 dB SNR with 99.9% accuracy. Also it is worth noting that they are > using NVIS antennas even on their mobile units. Their basic base/portable > NVIS antennas are not much more than multi-wire inverted Vs about 20 ft > above ground with a number radials/counter-poise. One of their most popular > lower throughput modems is a 96(?) tone OFDM type modem running
RE: [digitalradio] RE: Satellite vs HF Use by the U.S. Military
Title: RE: [digitalradio] RE: Satellite vs HF Use by the U.S. Military http://www.fcw.com/article91951-01-12-06-Web&newsletter%3Dyes Sorry,I didn't' include the URL previously. Walt -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:51 AM To: 'digitalradio@yahoogroups.com' Subject: [digitalradio] RE: Satellite vs HF Use by the U.S. Military I thought this interesting. If you follow the related links back to Fed Biz Ops (www.fbo.gov) you will find that this is a solicitation for commercial satellite equipment. Army releases satcom RFP BY Frank Tiboni Published on Jan. 12, 2006 The Army issued a solicitation today for the five-year, $5 billion World-Wide Satellite Systems contract. The contract will provide a vehicle for the military and government agencies to buy commercial terminals and services for satellite communications. The Army will award as many as six indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity deals in late spring 2006, with the intent for two to go to small businesses. The six commercial satellite terminals offered on the contract are very small-aperture terminals (VSATs) for combat service support, flyaway VSATs, deployable satellite Earth terminals, fixed-station terminals, military-certified terminals and prime mover/trailer-mounted terminals. They might be required to operate with military or commercial satellites in the C-, Ku-, X- and Ka-bands. - See my comments below... Walt/K5YFW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of kd4e Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:02 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] NTS and traffic handling and digital I would be much more interested to learn what the Chinese are up to in communications as they rush to build their massive military bent on imperialistic conquest. I think that they are doing like the Russians...they are experimenting with a number of high-speed, robust, HF modes. -- k5yfw Are they relying only on satellites or are they, like the Russian military, building redundant systems? The Chinese DO have a couple of very hardened geo-sync. communications satellites that are used by their military as well as in commercial commerce. But I suspect that in a military situation, all the bandwidth would become military. -- k5yfw What I am seeing would make for a good Tom Clancy novel where the most powerful military force on the earth is suddenly and predictably neutered and lesser forces are able to blackmail and/or annihalate the suddenly helpless technology-dependent forces of the USA. It would be interesting and an eye opener for sure...but does Tom Clancy understand the problem any more than the general American public? The American public has to understand the problem before they will purchase the book. -- k5yfw Perhaps Hams need to once again demonstrate the reliability of alternative methods and to build a network upon which at least some emergency communications may rely when the ones they imagine to be reliable fail, again. Oh yes...that's what I have been saying for over 3 years now. First we need an inexpensive, high-speed, robust, HF data mode that can easily send information (messages) that can be routed to other stations. But before you can build a routed network, you need the mode and software to support you file transfer and routing. -- k5yfw Not sure how we can help with the hyper-dependency of the newest fighter jets and others on computers and satellites. Don't know if they may even be flown if EMP weapons take out their computers and/or the key satellites are disabled. They could become billion dollar relics in a moment and they will soon be replacing less vulnerable craft. OK... -- k5yfw Sigh ... well, it is a hobby so I suppose we can only do what we can do and then nag our elected reps to take a closer look at the rest! The only thing that we can hope is that programmers recognize the need and "build" the mode and that someone pushes the mode and need for a network. I have been hoping that the ARRL would do this; but the only thing they have done is recommend that we restrict bandwidth on HF to 3.5 KHz which will kill development of really high-speed, robust, HF modes such as the Russians and Chinese are building that use 8-20 KHz. -- k5yfw doc > Currently (according to my source(s)...U.S. and foreign contractors working > for the DoD), Russia is using high-speed, robust digital modes on HF in > addition to satellite communications. They are running at least 19.2 Kbps > us
RE: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation?
Title: RE: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation? See my comments below. Walt/K5YFW -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of KV9U Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:37 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation? At this time, we do not have any really fast sound card modes available for amateur communication. Consider that: MT63 1K 1000 Hz wide 100 WPM -11 db MT63 2K 2000 Hz wide 200 WPM - 8 db MFSK16 340 Hz wide 40 WPM -18 db Olivia 500 to 1000 Hz ~ 40 WPM similar weak signal to MFSK16, some claim better I would like to see a file transfer mode that was at lease as robust as MT63 2K long interleave and at lease as error free as it currently is. but, perhaps twice as fast. I believe that the figures for both MT63 2K long interleave and MFSK16 are close. However, the test that KC7WW did on MT63 would indicate that MT63 1K wasn't as robust as MT63 2K...see http://www.johanforrer.net/hfpsk.htm -- k5yfw These numbers are only approximate depending on various sources/experiences, but give you a rough idea of relative comparisons. There are other factors e.g., ability to handle doppler flutter, interference, etc. Olivia can go wider and faster so should be able to approach or exceed 100 WPM with 8 tones at 2K. However, my experience with 8 tones suggested that it was not able to perform as well as MFSK16 on 80 meters under difficult conditions. And it would be tremendously wider. Part of that may be due to the baud rate as once you get above 50 baud, it becomes harder to get signals through under difficult conditions. Note that much research has been done on the optimum baud rate to use on HF. This started right after WWII with Stanford Research Institute and continued on during the Korean War by Stanford, Collins and others. Then during the Cold War by Rockwell-Collins, Magnavox, Harris RF Comm Gp, Ar -- k5yfw What would be nice is if we could get some modes to move closer to 40 to 50 baud as their main signalling speed since this is well known as the best overall baud rate that will still work much of the time on HF. Another improvement would be the ability to fall back (or forward) to different speeds depending upon conditions. I agree. 45.5 baud was the old (post WWII and Cold War) optimum baudrate for HF signaling and is what is used by most MIL-STD, FED-STD and STANAG HF data modes. If you applied this to say MT63, then you MIGHT see 300 WPM. -- k5yfw ARQ modes will make it possible to connect to various store and forward systems so that nets do not have to be in real time and will allow for the most convenient times for the operator. IMHO, I think any new high-speed, robust HF data mode should have an unconnected or broadcast mode as well as a connected or ARQ mode. -- k5yfw I have never quite understood why we can not have amateur modes that are similar in speed to the proprietary commercial modes other than the ability to switch back and forth as rapidly. And now that SCAMP has proven that switching speed is not needed for pipelined ARQ modes, it seems that it could be done. Sure, why not. I think you could easily have modes that operate at 136.5 baud, backdown to 91 baud and then down to 45.5 baud. Maybe even further down to 22.75 baud. -- k5yfw 73, Rick, KV9U DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote: > My ONLY digital operation now is a weekly net of about 30 minutes > which has been on MT63 on 40. We basically copy the NCS and list our > traffic. Then the NCS has us transmit the traffic. If the intended > recipient cannot copy the traffic, someone will relay it for you. > Almost all of us capture any traffic (which are files) sent on the net > in case someone needs a relay. Additionally there is some traffic > that is a broadcast to all stations. > > Thus far MT63 (2K long interleave) has been very robust but not as > fast as we would like. Most stations are running 100 SSB transceivers > and a NVIS antenna. > > The question is would MFSK16 or PSK63 be a better mode to run the net > on and then just pass the traffic on MT63? Also, are any of the above > modes more robust than MT63 and not too much slower (lower throughput)? > > Thanks and 73, > > Walt/K5YFW > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalr
[digitalradio] PSKFest Countdown!
The Fifth Annual PSKFest starts in only 3 Hours! For more info see http://www.podxs.com/html/pskfest.html 73 de Jay N3DQU Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Digital SSTV
The WAV format isn't significant for interoperability purposes. It's just a way of formatting input and output to/from the sound card in order to get it to work as a modem. This needs to be done without using a compressed audio format which would degrade the signal to noise ratio on send and recieve. Anyone is free to use any suitable format on any platform. Its the audio into and out of the radio that really counts - that's all analogue and a subset of DRM.Hope this helps.Darren, G0HWW. On 12 Jan 2006, at 04:58, kd4e wrote: Any idea why they chose the WAV file format? Is it, and the MS version of windows, more a matter of familiarity or is the WAV file format really the most efficient of the many alternatives? Also, anyone know if there are Linux apps that handle these formats, since an increasing number of Hams are moving to Linux? > Since Andy brought up the subject of Digital SSTV here is a web page that > will explain it better than I can. > http://web.aanet.com.au/betula/digital.htm You will also have to have a > program called Irfanview to view the pictures. > Joe W4JSI-- ~~ A blessed New Year to all! Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e 30-70% Off Christian Books, CD's, DVD's, etc. http://edenacres.bibleseven.com/b2i/b2i-index.html |_|___|_| | | & | | {| /\ {| / \ {| / \ {| / @ \ {| | |~_|| | -| | | \ # http://bibleseven.com/kd4e.html KD4E = West Central Florida /\ /\ ?(~~~{ @ @ } Sent from ( * Puppy Linux ( ) http://www.goosee.com/puppy ~ / / / / ~~~ Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
SPONSORED LINKS
Ham radio
Craft hobby
Hobby and craft supply
Icom ham radio
Yaesu ham radio
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [digitalradio] Digital SSTV? More on Hampal
Hi all, You can try using progressive decoding with Hampal and some other DRM based apps. This means that reception of a JPEG-2000 compressed JP2 file is not an all-or-nothing affair. You can view the image at various degrees of quality and resolution as it is decoded on the fly. This makes use of some plugins for a JPEG-2000 capable program called irfanview. Its pretty neat. Even without actively participating (i.e. transmitting Bad Segment Requests to the station sending the picture) I can receive many images completely and most images well enough from European stations on 80m (3.733MHz). Persistent QRM (like SSTV or SSB) will defeat DRM. Crackles, pops, short tuning cycles and other minor annoyances will be dealt with by the built in interleaving and dual Reed Solomon encoding in the main and by BSR + Fix on most other occasions. Often, I find that a Fix sent in response to another station's BSR will patch up my copy and finish off the picture. Waterfall text messages and waterfall pictures are the icing on the cake for me. Give it a try if your computer has enough grunt. It's worth a go. Darren, G0HWW Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.213.216 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation?
I am concerned about the feasiblity of using FEC modes for sending record type traffic. This has always been a problem on RTTY, I don't see why it would be any better on newer sound card modes. Would it be useful when specifying signal/noise ratios, as is done below, to state what level is needed for 100% error-free copy? I am new at the digimodes but I have seen errored copy over Olivia, mt63, and mfs16 during weak signal copy. This wouldn't be a good thing for carrying traffic. Comments? tim ab0wr On Friday 13 January 2006 13:28, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote: > See my comments below. > > Walt/K5YFW > > -Original Message- > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of KV9U > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:37 AM > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation? > > At this time, we do not have any really fast sound card modes available > for amateur communication. Consider that: > > MT63 1K 1000 Hz wide 100 WPM -11 db > MT63 2K 2000 Hz wide 200 WPM - 8 db > MFSK16 340 Hz wide40 WPM -18 db > Olivia 500 to 1000 Hz ~ 40 WPM similar weak > signal to MFSK16, some claim better > > I would like to see a file transfer mode that was at lease as robust > as MT63 2K > long interleave and at lease as error free as it currently is. but, > perhaps twice > as fast. > > I believe that the figures for both MT63 2K long interleave and > MFSK16 are close. > However, the test that KC7WW did on MT63 would indicate that MT63 1K > wasn't as > robust as MT63 2K...see http://www.johanforrer.net/hfpsk.htm > > -- k5yfw > > These numbers are only approximate depending on various > sources/experiences, but give you a rough idea of relative comparisons. > There are other factors e.g., ability to handle doppler flutter, > interference, etc. > > Olivia can go wider and faster so should be able to approach or exceed > 100 WPM with 8 tones at 2K. However, my experience with 8 tones > suggested that it was not able to perform as well as MFSK16 on 80 meters > under difficult conditions. And it would be tremendously wider. Part of > that may be due to the baud rate as once you get above 50 baud, it > becomes harder to get signals through under difficult conditions. > > Note that much research has been done on the optimum baud rate to > use on > HF. This started right after WWII with Stanford Research Institute > and > continued on during the Korean War by Stanford, Collins and others. > Then > during the Cold War by Rockwell-Collins, Magnavox, Harris RF Comm > Gp, Ar > -- k5yfw > > What would be nice is if we could get some modes to move closer to 40 > to 50 baud as their main signalling speed since this is well known as > the best overall baud rate that will still work much of the time on HF. > Another improvement would be the ability to fall back (or forward) to > different speeds depending upon conditions. > > I agree. 45.5 baud was the old (post WWII and Cold War) optimum > baudrate > for HF signaling and is what is used by most MIL-STD, FED-STD and > STANAG > HF data modes. > > If you applied this to say MT63, then you MIGHT see 300 WPM. > > -- k5yfw > > ARQ modes will make it possible to connect to various store and forward > systems so that nets do not have to be in real time and will allow for > the most convenient times for the operator. > > IMHO, I think any new high-speed, robust HF data mode should have > an unconnected or broadcast mode as well as a connected or ARQ mode. > > -- k5yfw > > I have never quite understood why we can not have amateur modes that are > similar in speed to the proprietary commercial modes other than the > ability to switch back and forth as rapidly. And now that SCAMP has > proven that switching speed is not needed for pipelined ARQ modes, it > seems that it could be done. > > Sure, why not. I think you could easily have modes that operate at > 136.5 > baud, backdown to 91 baud and then down to 45.5 baud. Maybe even > further > down to 22.75 baud. > > -- k5yfw > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U > > DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote: > > My ONLY digital operation now is a weekly net of about 30 minutes > > which has been on MT63 on 40. We basically copy the NCS and list our > > traffic. Then the NCS has us transmit the traffic. If the intended > > recipient cannot copy the traffic, someone will relay it for you. > > Almost all of us capture any traffic (which are files) sent on the net > > in case someone needs a relay. Additionally there is some traffic > > that is a broadcast to all stations. > > > > Thus far MT63 (2K long interleave) has been very robust but not as > > fast as we would like. Most stations are running 100 SSB transceivers > > and a NVIS antenna. > > > > The
Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation?
I may misunderstand this whole topic, but would not the speficied minimum signal to noise ratio be the "level" that is needed for 100% copy ? Andy K3UK On 1/13/06, Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am concerned about the feasiblity of using FEC modes for sending record typetraffic. This has always been a problem on RTTY, I don't see why it would be any better on newer sound card modes.Would it be useful when specifying signal/noise ratios, as is done below, tostate what level is needed for 100% error-free copy?I am new at the digimodes but I have seen errored copy over Olivia, mt63, and mfs16 during weak signal copy. This wouldn't be a good thing for carryingtraffic.Comments?tim ab0wrOn Friday 13 January 2006 13:28, DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote:> See my comments below. >> Walt/K5YFW>> -Original Message-> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> [mailto: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of KV9U> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:37 AM> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] What is the best mode for my operation? >> At this time, we do not have any really fast sound card modes available> for amateur communication. Consider that:>> MT63 1K 1000 Hz wide 100 WPM -11 db> MT63 2K 2000 Hz wide 200 WPM - 8 db > MFSK16 340 Hz wide40 WPM -18 db> Olivia 500 to 1000 Hz ~ 40 WPM similar weak> signal to MFSK16, some claim better>> I would like to see a file transfer mode that was at lease as robust > as MT63 2K> long interleave and at lease as error free as it currently is. but,> perhaps twice> as fast.>> I believe that the figures for both MT63 2K long interleave and > MFSK16 are close.> However, the test that KC7WW did on MT63 would indicate that MT63 1K> wasn't as> robust as MT63 2K...see http://www.johanforrer.net/hfpsk.htm >> -- k5yfw>> These numbers are only approximate depending on various> sources/experiences, but give you a rough idea of relative comparisons.> There are other factors e.g ., ability to handle doppler flutter,> interference, etc.>> Olivia can go wider and faster so should be able to approach or exceed> 100 WPM with 8 tones at 2K. However, my experience with 8 tones > suggested that it was not able to perform as well as MFSK16 on 80 meters> under difficult conditions. And it would be tremendously wider. Part of> that may be due to the baud rate as once you get above 50 baud, it > becomes harder to get signals through under difficult conditions.>> Note that much research has been done on the optimum baud rate to> use on> HF. This started right after WWII with Stanford Research Institute > and> continued on during the Korean War by Stanford, Collins and others.> Then> during the Cold War by Rockwell-Collins, Magnavox, Harris RF Comm> Gp, Ar> -- k5yfw >> What would be nice is if we could get some modes to move closer to 40> to 50 baud as their main signalling speed since this is well known as> the best overall baud rate that will still work much of the time on HF. > Another improvement would be the ability to fall back (or forward) to> different speeds depending upon conditions.>> I agree. 45.5 baud was the old (post WWII and Cold War) optimum > baudrate> for HF signaling and is what is used by most MIL-STD, FED-STD and> STANAG> HF data modes.>> If you applied this to say MT63, then you MIGHT see 300 WPM. >> -- k5yfw>> ARQ modes will make it possible to connect to various store and forward> systems so that nets do not have to be in real time and will allow for> the most convenient times for the operator. >> IMHO, I think any new high-speed, robust HF data mode should have> an unconnected or broadcast mode as well as a connected or ARQ mode.>> -- k5yfw>> I have never quite understood why we can not have amateur modes that are > similar in speed to the proprietary commercial modes other than the> ability to switch back and forth as rapidly. And now that SCAMP has> proven that switching speed is not needed for pipelined ARQ modes, it > seems that it could be done.>> Sure, why not. I think you could easily have modes that operate at> 136.5> baud, backdown to 91 baud and then down to 45.5 baud. Maybe even > further> down to 22.75 baud.>> -- k5yfw>> 73,>> Rick, KV9U>> DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote:> > My ONLY digital operation now is a weekly net of about 30 minutes > > which has been on MT63 on 40. We basically copy the NCS and list our> > traffic. Then the NCS has us transmit the traffic. If the intended> > recipient cannot copy the traffic, someone will relay it for you. > > Almost all of us capture any traffic (which are files) sent on the net> > in case someone needs a relay. Additionally there is some traffic> > that is a broadcast to all stations.> > > > Thus far MT63 (2K long interleave) has been very robust but no
[digitalradio] test the digitalradio DX Cluster's new address,
I need people external to my network to test the digitalradio DX Cluster's new address, Telnet net to telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Andy K3UK Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to 66.24.209.78 Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) SPONSORED LINKS Ham radio Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
