Charles Brabham wrote: > This is interesting in light of all the claims by WinLink and ALE > aficianados that that comprehensive signal-detection is 'impossible'.
Painting with an awfully wide brush, there. :-) You won't find most of the ALE folks I run with saying it's impossible. Just not implemented in some of the available programs. I'd love to see active signal detection progress past the current minimal signal detection capability in pc-ale. If it did not present violate the protocol (scan rates, etc) I see no reason not to leverage RSID detection in the ALE programs as a good neighbor approach. Mars-ale has a different target user, and does not have to deal with the issue, so it's just not been a development priority for Steve. That said, most of the cool magic in RSID seems to be for the narrowband modes in pulling signals out of the mud not visible on the waterfalls. And, where ALE 141 is not used. That said, RSID by itself won't solve your the problem you are alluding to..... RSID is not listening for 17 different protocols at once, just a very specific one at the beginning of a transmission. Big difference! The only way RSID would eliminate hidden terminal interference is if you monitored for longer than a typical transmission on the various modes. I'll be blunt, not many folks are going to wait 1-2 minutes on a seemingly empty frequency just in case an RSID surfaces! :-) Not to downplay active signal detection.... great idea, RSID is neat. Just not the same as monitoring for all protocols all the time. Have fun, Alan km4ba
