I was playing with the ideas of making adapters, but it is supprisingly difficult to throw audio exactly 90 degrees out of phase over a broad frequency range.
Anyway it might be practical to adopt the pilot tone to an HF radio. I'd transmit a 100Hz pilot tone, or something that would go through the filters or even let a little of the carrier get transmitted and then on the receive side use something like a 4046 to generate the 100 Hz LO and then feed the output of the phase comparator back into the RIT control On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Doug Bade <k...@thebades.net> wrote: > > > The demise of ACSSB in our area was the overall range was limited to poor > sensitivity relative to a similarly situated uhf repeater.. Typical > sensitivity of the mobiles was .4-.5~.6uv or so compared to sub .2uv on uhf > and vhf fm mobiles that were readily available.. Sound quality did not help > ... > > The noise floor is higher at 220 in many areas in the cities... compared to > uhf.... basically our UHF systems killed 220 acssb once we could start > trunking efficiently with LTR... there was no competition between the 2 as > UHF engineered well was superior... > > It was not possible to improve the sensitivity of the front end due to the > design of the hardware and systems typically could hear farther than they > could talk... so mobiles lost the site first... Typically most systems were > SEA that were actually getting loading... and those system cost a lot more > for 100w amps than the stock 20w.... SO most systems were deployed with 20w > transmitters at the site.. > talking to 20w mobiles.. the site had a preamp on rx.... the combiners > chewed up TX power ... lowering outbound ERP... Downlink power was always > less than uplink..... > > In FM 100w PA's are no issue to add at will to a 20w repeater...... > boosting the output of an ACSSB transmitter required a complex amp with a > feedback loop controlling gain.... $$$$$ not a $800.00 vocom or eq like on > FM... We only owned one and never deployed it... it double the cost of each > repeater... > > Performance was sub par for about any other radio operation including 800 > mhz....and probably 900.... > > Doug > KD8B > > > > At 03:46 PM 11/11/2009, you wrote: > > > > basically as the title states. i have never heard of acssb outside of > 220-222 mhz. > > seems to me acssb was a good idea and was curious as to why the ham > community has not picked up on it for mobile HF SSB use. > > seems to me having the benefits of SSB without the hassle of messing with a > clarifier all the time has it's advantages in a mobile environment. > > also it seems running a AOR ARD9000 type device over ACSSB would be a > really great advantage. > > i have zero experience with either of these modes so i am not sure how this > idea would turn out. > > i know that the likely reason is NBFM and P25 for the demise of ACSSB, but > as stated above seems to me it would be at home in the HF spectrum. > > I know i am going to get flamed for this, but i think ACSSB would make a > great replacement for standard ssb in the 11 meter market. > > it would also allow the use of CTCSS on HF using a more efficient mode then > FM. imagine haveing ACSSB 10 meter repeaters instead of FM. > > > >
