Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
At 05:02 PM 2/7/2010, you wrote: With the long qsb faded outs on 500 Khz 60 seconds ' in' 20 'out sort of thing arq is the only way of having a qso .. but most of the EU stations are limited to 100 Hz b/w .. How do you deal with a limit like that?
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
h think you might want to confirm that most EU stations are limited to 100hz B/W How would you explain all the Olivia, mPSK, pactor, and RFSM stations operating in EU? John VE5MU From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Becker, WØJAB Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 10:18 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions At 05:02 PM 2/7/2010, you wrote: With the long qsb faded outs on 500 Khz 60 seconds ' in' 20 'out sort of thing arq is the only way of having a qso .. but most of the EU stations are limited to 100 Hz b/w .. How do you deal with a limit like that?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
graham787 wrote: .. but most of the EU stations are limited to 100 Hz b/w .. Sorry, I may be missing something here, but which EU stations are limited to 100Hz bandwidth, and why? Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
graham787 wrote: Ok John ... EU 500 Khz allocation that is (appart from SM) most seem to have a 100 Hz tx limit the Uk has 501504 with no defined BW appart from the expected 'dont interfear'and no talking .. SM allows ssb as well The idea of 'Don't interfere' is understandable, but where does this Uk has 501504 with no defined BW appart from the expected 'dont interfear'and no talking come from? It isn't in the current UK regulations, and it wasn't even in the old regulations... There are no regulations in the UK licence conditions, and there were no such regulations in past years, restricting the bandwidth of the transmissions within the various Amateur Bands. You had to keep within the band edge of course, but this limit as stated makes no sense and seems to have no basis in any real licence condition here in the UK at all... Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
At 10:40 PM 2/1/2010, you wrote in part: but some of the other ARQ protocals I've played with look like a mess when you're a station on the outside looking in... I have never found that to be true with PACTOR or AMTOR. Can't speak for the sound card ARQ modes.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
W6IDS wrote: Hey Dave! Would it then be a fair assumption that you would not care for the likes of ALE, DRM, PACTOR, Digi SSTV, Analog SSTV, the new sparky offering called WINMOR, ALE400 - they're pretty much a Closed Club, or Private Channel affair, wouldn't you say? I think there's some others, but suffice it to say.. OH! I just remembered one candidate - DSTAR! The 145.350 Repeater in Cincinnati went DSTAR and poof! Now many ops are odd man out. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79NV - Original Message - From: kb3fxi kb3...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 11:40 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions I'm pretty darn happy with the performance of Olivia without the added complexity of ARQ and the one on one aspect of the ARQ protocals. I'm not sure about pskmail arq chat mode, but some of the other ARQ protocals I've played with look like a mess when you're a station on the outside looking in... that's something I really never liked about any of the ARQ/handshaking modes. It's like you're turning your little channel into a private line. FLDIGI has the WRAP checksum feature which allows an unlimited number of receiving stations to confirm 100% from a single uninterrupted transmission. And stations that don't have WRAP get to see the message too. -Dave, KB3FXI SNIP SNIP Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
Hey Dave! Would it then be a fair assumption that you would not care for the likes of ALE, DRM, PACTOR, Digi SSTV, Analog SSTV, the new sparky offering called WINMOR, ALE400 - they're pretty much a Closed Club, or Private Channel affair, wouldn't you say? I think there's some others, but suffice it to say.. OH! I just remembered one candidate - DSTAR! The 145.350 Repeater in Cincinnati went DSTAR and poof! Now many ops are odd man out. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79NV - Original Message - From: kb3fxi kb3...@yahoo.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 11:40 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions I'm pretty darn happy with the performance of Olivia without the added complexity of ARQ and the one on one aspect of the ARQ protocals. I'm not sure about pskmail arq chat mode, but some of the other ARQ protocals I've played with look like a mess when you're a station on the outside looking in... that's something I really never liked about any of the ARQ/handshaking modes. It's like you're turning your little channel into a private line. FLDIGI has the WRAP checksum feature which allows an unlimited number of receiving stations to confirm 100% from a single uninterrupted transmission. And stations that don't have WRAP get to see the message too. -Dave, KB3FXI SNIP SNIP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Performance of modes: weak signal and poor ionospheric conditions
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 4:00 PM, kb3fxi kb3...@yahoo.com wrote: MFSK16 always seems to come up near or at the top of the simulated tests but I can't duplicate that in the real world. My experience is that Olivia 8/500 does as well if not better and gives MUCH greater latitude in tuning while still providing 100% copy under moderate to poor conditions. Olivia 16/500 is much slower but goes way into the noise where I've had terrible results with MFSK16 under the same conditions. And if 8/250 Olivia (slower yet) doesn't do it, I just turn off the HF rig. Hi Dave, Yes, but Olivia 8/500 is slow enough it is frustrating for me. I don't do a lot of 80M NVIS work. I haven't had much trouble tuning MFSK16 but I certainly hear a lot of people saying just that so you must be right. I am usually on 20 meters or 80 with verticals. I did find that Digital Master 780 is 2 to 3 db less sensitive than the better programs for MFSK16 in my hands. Wes, WZ7I
