[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
The process itself may be trivial, but communication between it and the pmbo application, may or may not be trivial. I don't even know if the SBD part of scamp was designed as a unique process that could be run independently or if it had inter-process communications designed into it. It may very well have been written as a simple sub-routine in the scamp application instead. I'm not saying what you're recommending couldn't/shouldn't be done, I think it should be done sooner rather than later. I'm just saying that calling it trivial may be oversimplifying. Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The PMBO server software is an an application, not an operating > system running on bare hardware. Assuming the PC hosting this > software runs Windows, Linux, or Unix, then hosting the SCAMP Busy > Detector (SBD) as an independent process would definitely be trivial. > >73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" wrote: > > > > I really don't know anything about the pmbo software. What you > > describe may be trivial from a system analysis standpoint but > actually > > coding it may not be so easy. What you're describing is running a > > second process (SBD) and making the pmbo software communicate with > > that process. That may or may not be trivial depending on the pmbo > > software design. > > > > Jim > > WA0LYK > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" > wrote: > > > > > > No, it's actually trivial: > > > > > > 1. The PMBO's tranceiver's audio output is currently connected to > the > > > Pactor Modem's audio input; add a connection to the soundcard > input > > > (this might require adding a soundcard if one isn't already > present > > > in the PC that hosts the PMBO server software) > > > > > > 2. The SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) is incorporated in the PMBO > server > > > software (Server); this is entirely initialization and > configuration > > > (e.g. soundcard selection, detection thresholds). Once configured > and > > > initialized, the SBD is a black box with a single boolean output > that > > > indicates whether or not the current transceiver frequency is > busy. > > > > > > 3. The PMBO server software (Server) is in one of two states: > Idle, > > > or Processing a User Request; we need only modify its Idle state > > > behavior. When the SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) transitions > from "not > > > busy" to "busy" while the Server is Idle, there are two > possibilities: > > > > > > a. the frequency is busy because a WinLink user is transmitting a > > > request to the PMBO > > > > > > b. the frequency is busy because another QSO has begun or become > > > audible due to changing propagation > > > > > > To distinguish between these two possibilities, the Server waits > X > > > milliseconds after the SBD first reports "busy frequency", where > X is > > > the worst-case time required by the Pactor Modem to decode and > report > > > an incoming WinLink request. If such a request arrives from the > > > Pactor Modem within this interval, then the Server processes it > as > > > usual, ignoring the SBD. If no such request arrives within the > > > interval, then the Server clamps the Pactor Modem into its reset > > > state, preventing transmission on the frequency; this clamped > reset > > > is maintained until the SBD reports "frequency clear" for Y > > > consecutive seconds, after which the Server re-initializes the > Pactor > > > Modem and returns to Idle. 60 < Y < 300. > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" wrote: > > > > > > > > I don't know how hard it would be to pull this part of the > software > > > > out and run it on its own AND to control a transmitter with it. > > > > Remember, the pmbo is probably seeing a CTS indication from the > > > pactor > > > > modem. You would have to use another receiver and pc running > scamp > > > > and somehow get the pmbo software to recognize the CTS from that > > > > route. Probably not easy. It might be easier to get SCS to > include > > > > it in their firmware. > > > > > > > > Jim > > > > WA0LYK > > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the > > > failure > > > > > of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy > > > detector in > > > > > each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink > users, > > > and > > > > > minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. > > > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
The PMBO server software is an an application, not an operating system running on bare hardware. Assuming the PC hosting this software runs Windows, Linux, or Unix, then hosting the SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) as an independent process would definitely be trivial. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I really don't know anything about the pmbo software. What you > describe may be trivial from a system analysis standpoint but actually > coding it may not be so easy. What you're describing is running a > second process (SBD) and making the pmbo software communicate with > that process. That may or may not be trivial depending on the pmbo > software design. > > Jim > WA0LYK > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" wrote: > > > > No, it's actually trivial: > > > > 1. The PMBO's tranceiver's audio output is currently connected to the > > Pactor Modem's audio input; add a connection to the soundcard input > > (this might require adding a soundcard if one isn't already present > > in the PC that hosts the PMBO server software) > > > > 2. The SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) is incorporated in the PMBO server > > software (Server); this is entirely initialization and configuration > > (e.g. soundcard selection, detection thresholds). Once configured and > > initialized, the SBD is a black box with a single boolean output that > > indicates whether or not the current transceiver frequency is busy. > > > > 3. The PMBO server software (Server) is in one of two states: Idle, > > or Processing a User Request; we need only modify its Idle state > > behavior. When the SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) transitions from "not > > busy" to "busy" while the Server is Idle, there are two possibilities: > > > > a. the frequency is busy because a WinLink user is transmitting a > > request to the PMBO > > > > b. the frequency is busy because another QSO has begun or become > > audible due to changing propagation > > > > To distinguish between these two possibilities, the Server waits X > > milliseconds after the SBD first reports "busy frequency", where X is > > the worst-case time required by the Pactor Modem to decode and report > > an incoming WinLink request. If such a request arrives from the > > Pactor Modem within this interval, then the Server processes it as > > usual, ignoring the SBD. If no such request arrives within the > > interval, then the Server clamps the Pactor Modem into its reset > > state, preventing transmission on the frequency; this clamped reset > > is maintained until the SBD reports "frequency clear" for Y > > consecutive seconds, after which the Server re-initializes the Pactor > > Modem and returns to Idle. 60 < Y < 300. > > > > 73, > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" wrote: > > > > > > I don't know how hard it would be to pull this part of the software > > > out and run it on its own AND to control a transmitter with it. > > > Remember, the pmbo is probably seeing a CTS indication from the > > pactor > > > modem. You would have to use another receiver and pc running scamp > > > and somehow get the pmbo software to recognize the CTS from that > > > route. Probably not easy. It might be easier to get SCS to include > > > it in their firmware. > > > > > > Jim > > > WA0LYK > > > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the > > failure > > > > of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy > > detector in > > > > each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink users, > > and > > > > minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > > > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
I really don't know anything about the pmbo software. What you describe may be trivial from a system analysis standpoint but actually coding it may not be so easy. What you're describing is running a second process (SBD) and making the pmbo software communicate with that process. That may or may not be trivial depending on the pmbo software design. Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No, it's actually trivial: > > 1. The PMBO's tranceiver's audio output is currently connected to the > Pactor Modem's audio input; add a connection to the soundcard input > (this might require adding a soundcard if one isn't already present > in the PC that hosts the PMBO server software) > > 2. The SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) is incorporated in the PMBO server > software (Server); this is entirely initialization and configuration > (e.g. soundcard selection, detection thresholds). Once configured and > initialized, the SBD is a black box with a single boolean output that > indicates whether or not the current transceiver frequency is busy. > > 3. The PMBO server software (Server) is in one of two states: Idle, > or Processing a User Request; we need only modify its Idle state > behavior. When the SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) transitions from "not > busy" to "busy" while the Server is Idle, there are two possibilities: > > a. the frequency is busy because a WinLink user is transmitting a > request to the PMBO > > b. the frequency is busy because another QSO has begun or become > audible due to changing propagation > > To distinguish between these two possibilities, the Server waits X > milliseconds after the SBD first reports "busy frequency", where X is > the worst-case time required by the Pactor Modem to decode and report > an incoming WinLink request. If such a request arrives from the > Pactor Modem within this interval, then the Server processes it as > usual, ignoring the SBD. If no such request arrives within the > interval, then the Server clamps the Pactor Modem into its reset > state, preventing transmission on the frequency; this clamped reset > is maintained until the SBD reports "frequency clear" for Y > consecutive seconds, after which the Server re-initializes the Pactor > Modem and returns to Idle. 60 < Y < 300. > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" wrote: > > > > I don't know how hard it would be to pull this part of the software > > out and run it on its own AND to control a transmitter with it. > > Remember, the pmbo is probably seeing a CTS indication from the > pactor > > modem. You would have to use another receiver and pc running scamp > > and somehow get the pmbo software to recognize the CTS from that > > route. Probably not easy. It might be easier to get SCS to include > > it in their firmware. > > > > Jim > > WA0LYK > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" > wrote: > > > > > > I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the > failure > > > of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy > detector in > > > each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink users, > and > > > minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
There were some who were not that happy about the development attempt of SCAMP since they had such a large investment in their modems. But the owners wanted to come up with an alternative to the SCS modem. SCAMP was put on hold because the programmer did not have time to continue further programming due to the pressing needs of the changes they needed to make to the underlying infrastructure. From what I can tell, they have only one main programmer and while his ability is in the spectacular range, one person can only do so much. Almost no one else could do the things that he has been able to do. In fact, there were those who were claiming that it was not possible to do. But SCAMP just could not perform well enough to be useful on HF, except when conditions were quite favorable. It needed to either have the protocol replaced (OFDM?) which could then be made adaptive to conditions, or else it would need a fall back protocol. If you look at how the original Aplink system evolved to the old Winlink system, it was possible to run several modes at one time on the same equipment and the same frequencies. In fact, RTTY Digital Journal had a very detailed article on how this was done a decade or two ago. Very clever set up of equipment and switching capabilities. Remember at one time they had both Clover II and Pactor. If SCAMP had been competitive with Pactor 3 would it have been used? Absolutely, no question about it whatsoever. Many of those who now complain about Pactor 3, would been quite unhappy about SCAMP today as it was about the same bandwidth and was a very aggressive sounding mode. I would expect many more HF users of the Winlink 2000 system today and more use of the bands. 73, Rick, KV9U jgorman01 wrote: > Ask yourself why scamp died. Do you really think the winlink users > who have spent a thousand dollars or more on pactor modems are going > to relish throwing that investment away because the winlink admin's > have decided to go to a soundcard mode? > > Jim > WA0LYK > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
No, it's actually trivial: 1. The PMBO's tranceiver's audio output is currently connected to the Pactor Modem's audio input; add a connection to the soundcard input (this might require adding a soundcard if one isn't already present in the PC that hosts the PMBO server software) 2. The SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) is incorporated in the PMBO server software (Server); this is entirely initialization and configuration (e.g. soundcard selection, detection thresholds). Once configured and initialized, the SBD is a black box with a single boolean output that indicates whether or not the current transceiver frequency is busy. 3. The PMBO server software (Server) is in one of two states: Idle, or Processing a User Request; we need only modify its Idle state behavior. When the SCAMP Busy Detector (SBD) transitions from "not busy" to "busy" while the Server is Idle, there are two possibilities: a. the frequency is busy because a WinLink user is transmitting a request to the PMBO b. the frequency is busy because another QSO has begun or become audible due to changing propagation To distinguish between these two possibilities, the Server waits X milliseconds after the SBD first reports "busy frequency", where X is the worst-case time required by the Pactor Modem to decode and report an incoming WinLink request. If such a request arrives from the Pactor Modem within this interval, then the Server processes it as usual, ignoring the SBD. If no such request arrives within the interval, then the Server clamps the Pactor Modem into its reset state, preventing transmission on the frequency; this clamped reset is maintained until the SBD reports "frequency clear" for Y consecutive seconds, after which the Server re-initializes the Pactor Modem and returns to Idle. 60 < Y < 300. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't know how hard it would be to pull this part of the software > out and run it on its own AND to control a transmitter with it. > Remember, the pmbo is probably seeing a CTS indication from the pactor > modem. You would have to use another receiver and pc running scamp > and somehow get the pmbo software to recognize the CTS from that > route. Probably not easy. It might be easier to get SCS to include > it in their firmware. > > Jim > WA0LYK > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" wrote: > > > > I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the failure > > of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy detector in > > each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink users, and > > minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. > > > > 73, > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
I don't know how hard it would be to pull this part of the software out and run it on its own AND to control a transmitter with it. Remember, the pmbo is probably seeing a CTS indication from the pactor modem. You would have to use another receiver and pc running scamp and somehow get the pmbo software to recognize the CTS from that route. Probably not easy. It might be easier to get SCS to include it in their firmware. Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the failure > of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy detector in > each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink users, and > minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
Other folks would say "I just don't understand anyone would spend thousand of dollars on radios, antennas, computers and other related hardware just to exchange signal reports with someone you could more easily talk to on Skype". Other than keeping it non-commerical, we should avoid any attempt to legislate content. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ivey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guys, > > Like I have said before, the only way to solve this is to designate a certain portion on each band just for this type of communications. > > I just don't understand anyone would spend thousand of dollars on radios, antennas, computers and other related hardware just to pass email. > > Joe > W4JSI > > - Original Message - > From: jgorman01 > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 6:07 PM > Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Busy detector > > > Ask yourself why scamp died. Do you really think the winlink users > who have spent a thousand dollars or more on pactor modems are going > to relish throwing that investment away because the winlink admin's > have decided to go to a soundcard mode? > > Jim > WA0LYK > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" wrote: > > > > I have been lobbying the WinLink team to do this for years, without > > success. You are more than welcome to try, Jose. > > > > 73, > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > > > > > As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy > > of > > > > good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy > > > > detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an > > ~80% > > > > confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers > > were > > > > amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration. > > > > > > > > Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would > > take > > > > years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% > > of > > > > the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like > > > > WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! > > > > > > > > Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to > > do > > > > it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that > > useful > > > > busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard. > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > I understand that 80% is fairly good. Hope the long standing > > > anti-automatic stations lobby sees it as acceptable as well. > > > > > > What is seemingly left, then, is to simply push the busy detector > > into > > > practice and 24/7 service. > > > > > > Who will get the task done? > > > > > > 73, Jose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > > > V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía > > y Educación Energética. > > > 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007 > > > Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba > > > http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier > > > > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
I agree with your point, Jim. However, it doesn't explain the failure of the WinLink organization to incorporate the SCAMP busy detector in each of their PMBOs. This would have no impact on WinLink users, and minimal $ impact on PMBO operators. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jgorman01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ask yourself why scamp died. Do you really think the winlink users > who have spent a thousand dollars or more on pactor modems are going > to relish throwing that investment away because the winlink admin's > have decided to go to a soundcard mode? > > Jim > WA0LYK > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" wrote: > > > > I have been lobbying the WinLink team to do this for years, without > > success. You are more than welcome to try, Jose. > > > >73, > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > > > > > As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy > > of > > > > good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy > > > > detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an > > ~80% > > > > confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers > > were > > > > amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration. > > > > > > > > Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would > > take > > > > years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% > > of > > > > the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like > > > > WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! > > > > > > > > Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to > > do > > > > it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that > > useful > > > > busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard. > > > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > > >Dave, AA6YQ > > > > > > I understand that 80% is fairly good. Hope the long standing > > > anti-automatic stations lobby sees it as acceptable as well. > > > > > > What is seemingly left, then, is to simply push the busy detector > > into > > > practice and 24/7 service. > > > > > > Who will get the task done? > > > > > > 73, Jose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > > > V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía > > y Educación Energética. > > > 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007 > > > Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba > > > http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
Guys, Like I have said before, the only way to solve this is to designate a certain portion on each band just for this type of communications. I just don't understand anyone would spend thousand of dollars on radios, antennas, computers and other related hardware just to pass email. Joe W4JSI - Original Message - From: jgorman01 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2007 6:07 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Busy detector Ask yourself why scamp died. Do you really think the winlink users who have spent a thousand dollars or more on pactor modems are going to relish throwing that investment away because the winlink admin's have decided to go to a soundcard mode? Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have been lobbying the WinLink team to do this for years, without > success. You are more than welcome to try, Jose. > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" > wrote: > > > > > > Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > > > As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy > of > > > good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy > > > detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an > ~80% > > > confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers > were > > > amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration. > > > > > > Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would > take > > > years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% > of > > > the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like > > > WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! > > > > > > Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to > do > > > it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that > useful > > > busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard. > > > > > > 73, > > > > > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > > I understand that 80% is fairly good. Hope the long standing > > anti-automatic stations lobby sees it as acceptable as well. > > > > What is seemingly left, then, is to simply push the busy detector > into > > practice and 24/7 service. > > > > Who will get the task done? > > > > 73, Jose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía > y Educación Energética. > > 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007 > > Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba > > http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
Ask yourself why scamp died. Do you really think the winlink users who have spent a thousand dollars or more on pactor modems are going to relish throwing that investment away because the winlink admin's have decided to go to a soundcard mode? Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have been lobbying the WinLink team to do this for years, without > success. You are more than welcome to try, Jose. > >73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" > wrote: > > > > > > Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > > > As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy > of > > > good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy > > > detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an > ~80% > > > confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers > were > > > amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration. > > > > > > Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would > take > > > years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% > of > > > the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like > > > WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! > > > > > > Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to > do > > > it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that > useful > > > busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard. > > > > > > 73, > > > > > >Dave, AA6YQ > > > > I understand that 80% is fairly good. Hope the long standing > > anti-automatic stations lobby sees it as acceptable as well. > > > > What is seemingly left, then, is to simply push the busy detector > into > > practice and 24/7 service. > > > > Who will get the task done? > > > > 73, Jose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía > y Educación Energética. > > 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007 > > Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba > > http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier > > >
[digitalradio] Re: Busy detector
I have been lobbying the WinLink team to do this for years, without success. You are more than welcome to try, Jose. 73, Dave, AA6YQ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Jose A. Amador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dave Bernstein wrote: > > > As is often the case in engineering, Jose, perfect is the enemy of > > good. What Rick KN6KB discovered while developing SCAMP's busy > > detector was that he could detect CW, PSK, Pactor, and SSB at an ~80% > > confidence level without enormous difficulty. SCAMP beta testers were > > amazed by the effectiveness of this first iteration. > > > > Pushing the confidence level from 80% to 100%, however, would take > > years -- if its even possible. But a busy detector that works 80% of > > the time would cut QRM from unattended automated stations (like > > WinLink PMBOs) by a factor of 5! > > > > Your comment that "many think it is simpler than it really is to do > > it WELL" is frankly moot; Rick demonstrated two years ago that useful > > busy frequency detection was implementable on a PC and soundcard. > > > > 73, > > > >Dave, AA6YQ > > I understand that 80% is fairly good. Hope the long standing > anti-automatic stations lobby sees it as acceptable as well. > > What is seemingly left, then, is to simply push the busy detector into > practice and 24/7 service. > > Who will get the task done? > > 73, Jose > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación Energética. > 22 al 25 de mayo de 2007 > Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba > http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier >
