Hi Jose,
"in the latest version that problem is fixed. Now ROS no decode new station
until a first station has finished.Please, use latest version. Old version has
thats problem"
You may be directing you statement to Skip.
I have not downloaded ROS yet. I was waiting for your mode to mature a bit. I
am very interested in new modes and am an always interested in experimented
with them.
"you have doubs about ROS is better you speak directly with the author of the
mode. He is the only that know how it work."
I have no doubts, I was not really asking how ROS works, but am asking those
who have played with the mode to date their real world experience.
Jose,
When you designed this mode, what were the major benefits you were going for
over other modes like Olivia for example. I assumed that it was better
resistance to QRM, is this correct?
Thanks in advance,
Warren - K5WGM
--- On Fri, 2/26/10, jose alberto nieto ros <nietoro...@yahoo.es> wrote:
From: jose alberto nieto ros <nietoro...@yahoo.es>
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, February 26, 2010, 1:41 PM
Hi Warren, in the latest version that problem is fixed. Now ROS no decode
new station until a first station has finished.
Please, use latest version. Old version has thats problem, and when you have
doubs about ROS is better you speak directly with the author of the mode. He is
the only that know how it work.
Thanks
De: KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net>
Para: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Enviado: vie,26 febrero, 2010 20:27
Asunto: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
Hi Warren,
I do not know of any way to change bandwidth in ROS. My observations with ROS
is that another ROS station on the same frequency will make ROS stop decoding
the first station and start decoding the next. I don't know if it is a matter
of strength, but I guess it is. The reason for this is that if the second
station is weaker than the first, the first will continue decoding and I will
not know there is another signal on the frequency, until one or the other
fades. Any wideband signal, like Pactor, covering about the upper forth of the
ROS signal also stops decoding.
Olivia is much more narrow than ROS, so the chances of QRM to ROS are much
greater, and harder to get away from, since ROS is so wide.
Jose admits that QRM from wideband signals cannot be tolerated, but narrowband
signals (like PSK31) can be, and I can understand that, but ROS is still a
wideband signal, even if the tones are randomly spaced and separated a
lot, and you can see what happens when one ROS signal comes on the frequency
used by another ROS signal just by monitoring a popular ROS frequency. 14.101
is particularly bad for Pactor QRM, both from Pactor I, Pactor-II and
Pactor-III.
I don't use Olivia enough on HF to know how it handles same-frequency
interference. I use Olivia daily only on UHF, where it works as well as SSB
phone, or sometimes a little better, under severe Doppler flutter and QSB on
70cm DX. I am hoping that ROS will do even better. I think the 1 baud mode may
be very good for "real time" VHF DX or EME QSO's. Unfortunately, we can only
use ROS above 222, so 2m EME is not possible yet for us using ROS. I hope some
day it will be.
73 - Skip KH6TY
Warren Moxley wrote:
Hi Skip,
Does ROS have any flexibility like Olivia where you can change the Bandwidth? I
am thinking it must not. SS modes that we all have experience with ( Cells,
WiFi, etc ) seem to work well on top of each other and seem not to interfere
with each other (for the most part). I was wondering if several hams using ROS
that are one top of each other, does it work better than say, Olivia?
Warren - K5WGM
--- On Fri, 2/26/10, KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net> wrote:
From: KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net>
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, February 26, 2010, 8:27 AM
Hi Warren,
I have already captured a spectrum of Olivia 32-100 (i.e., FSK32) and posted it
in a reply, but glad do it again.. You can see the fixed frequencies at idle
and then the new frequencies added when data is sent (in the "seared" middle
part). I have not combined that on one uploaded page with the ROS spectrum
analysis, but you can easily compare the two yourself, using the ROS spectral
analysys with MFSK16. I wanted to confirm that both MFSK16 and Olivia 32-100
had the same signature of FSK, and they do, which is far different from the
signature of ROS. It is very clear that ROS is using Frequency Hopping, as the
frequencies are not a function of the data, and that is a unique characteristic
of frequency hopping, at least according to everything I could find.
Olivia 32-1000: http://home. comcast.net/ ~hteller/
OLIVIA32- 1000.JPG
73 - Skip KH6TY
Warren Moxley wrote:
Skip, can you show some more spectral comparison examples? This time add the
widest Olivia mode and other very wide modes.
Thanks in advance,
Warren - K5WGM
--- On Fri, 2/26/10, KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net> wrote:
From: KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net>
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, February 26, 2010, 8:11 AM
Jose, my attempted help is to let you understand that the FCC believed you when
you said ROS is FHSS, so you will fail in any attempt to reclassify ROS as just
FKS144. The FCC will not believe you. What will probably succeed is for you to
continue to describe ROS as FHSS and let the FCC permit it in the USA as long
as it can be monitored, the bandwidth does not exceed the wide of a SSB phone
signal, and it is not used in either the phone bands (data is illegal there
anyway) or in the band segments where narrow modes, such as PSK31 are used
because it is as wide as the entire PSK31 activity area.
Look at the spectral comparison http://home. comcast.net/ ~hteller/ SPECTRUM.
JPG. In the middle, I am sending data by MFSK16 (the letters "N"), and you can
see that the frequencies are being determined by the data, which means it is not
FHSS. But, in the middle of the ROS spectral display, I am doing the same
thing, and there is no change to the frequencies being transmitted, obviously
because the frequencies are independent of the data, which is requirement #2 in
the ROS documentation for FHSS. This definitely implies ROS is FHSS.
If you really want ROS to be legal here, just support a petition to the FCC to
allow it.
73 - Skip KH6TY
jose alberto nieto ros wrote:
If you are waste time in try demostrate ROS is a SS, i think you are not trying
help.
De: KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net>
Para: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Enviado: vie,26 febrero, 2010 14:36
Asunto: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
> jose alberto nieto ros wrote:
> I propose to moderator you will be banned if you continue saying stupid
> things in this group.
Moderated for stupidity? Now that will be a first!
Good luck with trying to fool the FCC. Spectral analysis suggests ROS really is
FHSS, no matter what you now try to claim.
This picture does not lie: http://home. comcast.net/ ~hteller/ SPECTRUM. JPG
Too bad - ROS is a fun mode and I cannot use it in USA except on UHF.
I have only tried to help find a way for US hams to use ROS. It will be an
honor to be banned for my stupidity! :-) Please go ahead as you wish.
73, Skip KH6TY SK
jose alberto nieto ros wrote:
My friend, one thing is what i wrote, and other different is what ROS is.
If recommend you waste your time in doing something by Ham Radio, instead of
criticism ROS.
I propose to moderator you will be banned if you continue saying stupid things
in this group.
De: KH6TY <kh...@comcast. net>
Para: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
Enviado: vie,26 febrero, 2010 13:18
Asunto: Re: [digitalradio] ROS carrier pattern when idle
> If MFSK16 was randomized would it magically become spread-spectrum?
Alan, sorry I forgot to reply to this question.
The answer is yes, but only if the following three conditions are ALL met (from
the ROS documentation) :
1. The signal occupies a bandwidth much in excess of the minimum bandwidth
necessary to send the information.
2. Spreading is accomplished by means of a spreading signal, often called a
code signal, which is independent of the data.
3. At the receiver, despreading (recovering the original data) is accomplished
by the correlation of the received spread signal with a synchronized replica of
the spreading signal used to spread the information.
Standard modulation schemes as frequency modulation and pulse code modulation
also spread the spectrum of an information signal, but they do not qualify as
spread-spectrum systems since they do not satisfy all the conditions outlined
above.
Looking at
the comparison between ROS and MFSK16, http://home. comcast.net/ ~hteller/
SPECTRUM. JPG, it is easy to see that MFSK16 is not FHSS, but ROS definitely is.
Another thing that a petition should include is a requirement that ROS only be
used BELOW the phone segments and ABOVE the narrowband data segments. On 20m,
that means only between 14.1 and 14.225, because ROS is so wide.
BTW, this same issue came up during the "regulation by bandwidth" debate when
the ARRL HSMM (High Speed MultiMedia) proponents wanted to allow wideband,
short timespan, signals everywhere with the argument that they last such a
short time on any given frequency that they do not interfere, but the fallacy
to that argument is that when you get a multitude of HSMM signals on at the
same time, all together they can ruin communication for narrow modes, like
PSK31.
The other problem is that SHARING of frequencies requires that users of one
mode be able to communicate with users of another mode in the same space so QRL
or QSY can be used. It was realized that only CW used by both parties would
make this possible. ROS does not work well in a crowded environment or with
wideband QRM, so it must find a home relatively clear of other mode QRM. This
is just another job the FCC must do in order to be sure a new mode does not
create chaos. It has already been shown that leaving that up just to hams does
not work, and the strongest try to take over the frequencies.
upper
73 - Skip KH6TY
Alan Barrow wrote:
If MFSK16 was randomized would it magically become spread-spectrum?
