[digitalradio] transmission speeds
I downloaded the latest version of NBEMS yesterday and hooked up with WB8NUT. PSK31 was a tough copy so switched to MFSK. Successfully transferred a 750byte file in 210 seconds ARQ. Also liked the chat function in Flarq, works well. I tried the same text file with different modes to see what the TX times were, and came up with the following: Standard 750 byte file, no ARQ unless noted MFSK : 2 minutes, 10 seconds PSK31: 2 minutes,30 seconds PSK63 : 1 minute,16 seconds PSK125: 37 seconds RTTY (45) 2 minutes 31 seconds Olivia (500/8) 4 minutes, 17 seconds ALE400 (ARQ) 2 minutes, 15 seconds Surprised that MFSK is a little faster than PSK31 and works better under the generally poor conditions we have lately John VE5MU
[digitalradio] Re: P25 or D-Star Software
Currently, no. The modem part of P25 and D-Star(in the C4FM mode) aren't too challenging, so those should be able to be done in software(although P25 is known to need a CLEAN discriminator tap on receive, something many scanner users realized they didn't have when trying to decode P25 trunking data). The hard part is the vocoder. Actually getting audio in and out of the datastream requires licensing a proprietary codec(VERY expensive, some have claimed that the price of P25 equipment is dominated by the vocoder license), or using a proprietary IC. P25 and D-Star use similar vocoders(in fact, those in the know have suggested that the same IC may be able to handle both systems, even though the literature doesn't mention it). Recently, a DVSI vocoder dongle that interfaces the vocoder IC to a PC has become available, so it's likely this problem will be solved soon. If it is interfaced with some modem software, a software solution will likely be possible. Check out the vocoder dongle here: http://www.moetronix.com/dvdongle/ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Gmail - Home [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, Know this may be a stupid question, but going to ask anyway. The two digital modes for voice are P25 and D-Star? These a built into the radio, so is there any computer software that allows one to use the mode? Thanks Kevin, ZL1KFM. Get Skype and call me for free.
[digitalradio] New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK Pour les francophones: la version française de ce message se trouve sur mon site (http://f6cte.free.fr). Il suffit de cliquer sur le lien Principales modifications (courriel avertissant de la sortie de la nouvelle version). Hello to all Ham and SWL, The new release of MULTIPSK (4.7) is in my Web site (http://f6cte.free.fr). The main mirror site is Earl's, N8KBR: http://multipsk.eqth.info/index.html (click on United States Download Site #1). Another mirror site isTerry's: http://www.hamshack.co.uk/ Multispk associated to Clock are freeware programs but with functions submitted to a licence (by user key). The main modifications of MULTIPSK 4.7 are the following: 1) Decoding of ACARS mode in VHF The ACARS (Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System) VHF mode is a digital datalink system allowing transmission of small messages between aircraft and ground stations in VHF. It is available for licencied copies, only (otherwise, the decoding is stopped after 5 minutes). See specifications further on. 2) GMDSS DSC: possibility to display ships position on a local map chosen by the user. 3) Interface with: - DXView, which locates the exported callsign from Multipsk on a map, gives you geographical information about it and directs your antenna towards this callsign, - Pathfinder, which, from the exported callsign from Multipsk, does a search of the callsign, on the chosen database (QRZ for example) and gives you the available information about this callsign. These softwares belong to the DXLAB suite (from Dave AA6YQ). 4) ADIF and DXKEEPER export under 2.1.9 ADIF specification The submode (32-1000 Hz for Olivia, for example) is exported towards DXKEEPER version 6.1.0 minimum (DXLAB). 5) addition of RTTY 110, 150 and 200 bauds modes in RX only. 6) ARQ FAE in ALE and ALE400 - Improvement of the Outlook Express (or equivalent) outgoing mails handling, - Automatic transfert of received ARQ FAE messages, to Internet addresses via Outlook Express e-mails (for licencied copies), - Possibility to work in Responder. 7) button N near Name: it is determined and displayed the number of QSO done with this Ham and the number of QSO done with this Ham and in this mode. 8) Improvement of the radio mailbox for a easier handling of messages. 9) Labels printing for the QSOs of the logbook. For information, for all the Multipsk exotic modes (PSKFEC31, PSK10, PSKAM, PSK63F, PSK220F (+DIGISSTV), CCW-FSK, MFSK8, THROBX, DominoF, DominoEX, PAX, CHIP, Voice, Packet 110 bauds...), I propose the QRP frequency: 14075 Khz USB (AF around 1000 Hz), at 17h00 UTC. 73 Patrick ACARS in VHF The ACARS (Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System) VHF mode is a digital datalink system allowing transmission of small messages between aircraft and ground stations via radio (VHF). Description : Baud rate : 2400. Modulation : MSK two tones ( mark and space ) with a shift between tones of 1200 Hz (fixed tones at 1200 and 2400 Hz) Reception mode: AM Character set : ASCII characters (7 bits) + a final parity bit Shape of pulse : rectangular Bandwidth : about 3 KHz Demodulation : non coherent Synchronization : automatic using the signal Detection code : yes on 16 bits. Interleaving : no Pmean/Ppeak : 1 According to the ARINC 618 specification, each frame contains: * a pre-key of 128 bits at 1 (2400 Hz carrier for 0.05 second) * Bit synchronization. 2 characters + and * to synchronize at bit level, * Character synchronization: 2 characters SYN (CHR(22)) to synchronize at character level, * ACARS start of transmission: character SOH (CHR(1)), * Mode: a character for the type of transmission with the ground stations (2, @, A to Z, [, \, ]), * Address: aircraft registration number. This number corresponds either to an aircraft type and an airline company or to a flight identifier (airline on 2 characters and number on 4 alphanumeric characters), * Acknowledgement: a character 0-9, a-z or A-Z for pour the acknowledgement and the NAK (CHR(21)) character to refuse the acknowledgement, * label: two characters to designate the type of message, * Block identifier: on one character 0-9, a-z or A-Z * End of preamble: character STX (CHR(2)), * Text: message (optional). The (variable) maximal size is 220 characters, * Suffix: character ETX (CHR(3)) indicating the end of the message, * BCS (Block Check Sequence): control code of the frame on 2 characters, * BCS suffix: character DEL (CHR(127)). Note 1: Multipsk decodes neither the PSK Acars in VHF nor the HF Acars. Note 2: Multipsk can fix two single errors.
[digitalradio] Re: P25 or D-Star Software
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, mikenetbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, no. The modem part of P25 and D-Star(in the C4FM mode) aren't too challenging, so those should be able to be done in software(although P25 is known to need a CLEAN discriminator tap on receive, something many scanner users realized they didn't have when trying to decode P25 trunking data). The hard part is the vocoder. Actually getting audio in and out of the datastream requires licensing a proprietary codec(VERY expensive, some have claimed that the price of P25 equipment is dominated by the vocoder license), or using a proprietary IC. P25 and D-Star use similar vocoders(in fact, those in the know have suggested that the same IC may be able to handle both systems, even though the literature doesn't mention it). Recently, a DVSI vocoder dongle that interfaces the vocoder IC to a PC has become available, so it's likely this problem will be solved soon. If it is interfaced with some modem software, a software solution will likely be possible. Check out the vocoder dongle here: http://www.moetronix.com/dvdongle/ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Gmail - Home sparcnz@ wrote: Hi All, Know this may be a stupid question, but going to ask anyway. The two digital modes for voice are P25 and D-Star? These a built into the radio, so is there any computer software that allows one to use the mode? Thanks Kevin, ZL1KFM. Get Skype and call me for free.
[digitalradio] Re: P25 or D-Star Software
I stand corrected! The software came out yesterday, and it is now possible to demodulate D- Star with a soundcard. If you have the DVSI dongle, you'll be able to recover audio. Amazing! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstarsoftware/message/1
[digitalradio] Commercial APRS
Guys, I work for our local County as their Radio Tech and our Road Department would like to be able to keep tabs on some, not all, of their vehicles, especially in areas where their cell phone coverage is flaky at best. They have a UHF system located on a mountain top approximately 4250', centrally located within the County. Not having any experience with APRS, would this be a viable way to do this? I know that APRS can be monitored via the internet, but is that strictly for Amateur use, or can the software be purchased for commercial useage? Thanks! Rod KC7CJO Clackamas County Electronic Services, Radio Shop - Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK Patrick, Would you please outline the best way to update Multipsk. I don't do it very often and where the files go gets confusing. For example, do we download your file, expand it to a temporary folder, then click some setup/installer icon in the temporary folder and navigator to the original folder were it will replace everything but keep preferences? Thank you and 73, Paul
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. It takes time to learn what it can do but is well worth the effort. Quite honestly I don't mind the interface - been using it for 3 years and you learn to live with the quirks. I like the fact that Patrick F6CTE (the author) spends his time inventing, developing and improving digi-modes rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio using dead-bug or Manhattan construction. Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job that matters. 73, Sholto KE7HPV.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Sholto Fisher wrote: Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. It takes time to learn what it can do but is well worth the effort. Quite honestly I don't mind the interface - been using it for 3 years and you learn to live with the quirks. I like the fact that Patrick F6CTE (the author) spends his time inventing, developing and improving digi-modes rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio using dead-bug or Manhattan construction. Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job that matters. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Sholto, I heartily second that. Well put. Those who complain about the UI really need to go away and use another Program. No it is not all about ALE as it has all the other digital programs and more. Kevin VK5OA
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Frank, I am running it under Vista on this box without any problems. I like Multipsk for a variety of reasons. It offers many modes and despite what some claim is a cluttered interface, I prefer being able to change modes without fighting through numerous pull-down menus. Suspect the biggest reason people like it is due to Patrick himself - he is very responsive to any questions or suggestions. I use ALE on occasion, mostly ALE400 as it has a great deal to offer in a relatively narrow bandwidth but far from the only reason I prefer Multipsk to other apps. I am not a fan of fatter is better in and of itself. To me registering Multipsk was one of my few good investments. I do use a variety of other programs, but still prefer Multipsk when running a mode it supports. 73, Bill N9DSJ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Tooner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
[digitalradio] MT63 Hardware Question
I know just about everybody does MT63 on a soundcard. I've done MT63 on a soundcard. The question is: Does anybody know of any hardware (modem type) device out there that does MT63? No soundcard. Dave K7UXO
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Frank, I have had older versions in 32 bit Vista with similar error messages but it seemed to work. I normally have been staying with my WinXP box since I have the sound card and USB ports connected to that computer and moving them back and forth is not trivial. Lately, with version 4.6 I don't seem to have this but right now I don't have USB ports connected to the rig/interface so maybe that makes a difference. For Chip64, which I once thought was no longer used, but have found that some digital nets use the software, especially because it seems to perform well against lightning static, I would have to recommend Nino's program. The digital group in Virginia says that it works the best in decoding. Patrick has been the most inventive of any of the amateur radio software digital program developers. We have mentioned to him about the interface but he prefers to have it this way. He is willing to work with other amazing software developers such as Dave Berstein and interoperate with the DXLab suite. Especially rig control such as the CI-V. My ideal would be to have a simpler interface, especially if I wish to sell digital modes to others for such things as emergency use. I find that I have been often using software that makes up the NBEMS program now that it was ported to Windows with VBdigi, and is the only cross platform Windows/Linux program of its type. The interface is not pretty either, but very functional and of course not as cluttered since it only has a few basic modes plus the ability to ARQ with the flarq program. The main reason for using Multipsk for me now has been the superb FAE 400 mode. No other mode has those features and at the same time has memory ARQ. Now if we could just get more hams to use it. 73, Rick, KV9U Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] MT63 Hardware Question
To answer that in one word, no. Ain't going to happen. The reason so so many use the sound card modes right now is because they don't have to *buy* some black box to do it. John, W0JAB At 08:49 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote: I know just about everybody does MT63 on a soundcard. I've done MT63 on a soundcard. The question is: Does anybody know of any hardware (modem type) device out there that does MT63? No soundcard. Dave K7UXO
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
I gave it a try for the first time about a year ago. It was very confusing for a first time user. Rather then have the main screen loaded with all the modes I think it would be a lot better the have a drop down under a mode button with settings. But that just me. I deleted it from the system and have not tried again since. John, W0JAB At 09:23 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC Well, your guessing is misleading you. For me, the most important part of a program of its kind is not the eye candy, but what it does and how it does. And certainly MultiPSK does its stuff WELL, and is among the pioneers in more than one front. It is an innovative communications program that is useful in many modes, as a peek at its specs will show you. It is not the first time that Vista FAILS with an otherwise working software. The list of Vista shortcomings is long, starting with an excessively greedy hardware requirement, and the requirement that the software it runs be rewritten according to its requirements. It is like changing the car controls in a new car model, which requires a new kind of highways. MultiPSK has worked well with XP, Win2000 and I used the previous versions on my old Win98 and now retired PC. Also works well under Linux with Wine. Can you correctly guess now what is flawed? Beauty is on the eye of the beholder. And it does not tell the whole truth. 73, Jose, CO2JA __ Participe en Universidad 2008. 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008. Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba http://www.universidad2008.cu
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
For me personally MultiPSK allows me to enjoy ham radio my way. I like to experiment and be on the edge of new digimode technology and concepts. The learning curve keeps my mind sharp. I can also talk to Patrick as a fellow amateur and suggest things and he takes the time and courtesy to address every point I have ever put to him. Some of my ideas end up in MultiPSK too. I have a registered version of MultiPSK and it was well worth the money. Fantastic deal really if you consider what I ended up with in the 3+ years I have been using it. But I do admit I am still a dyed-in-the-wool CW guy and love nothing more than to turn off the computers (including the old Pentium 200 running DOS) and use a straight key with my QRP radios to my homemade dipoles. This, just like mucking around with MultiPSK, feels like real radio to me. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Tooner wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/
[digitalradio] Re: RFSM 8000
1. A few words about OFDM and serial tone modem. Let's find out how the fight between ISI and Doppler shift takes place in these systems. OFDM uses the great number of low speed channels so the symbol duration increases. While the duration of ISI is much smaller than symbol duration everything goes well. Consequently there is an aim to increase the number of channels ad infinitum BUT at the same time natural limitation takes place. It's just a Doppler shift effect. Hence there is always a compromise between ISI and Doppler shift. Moreover we should take into consideration a big peak factor which results in non-effective usage of power of transceiver. There are methods directed at improvement of peak-factor, but the most part of them makes the system characteristics worse. In case of serial tone modulation the fight ISI with Doppler is provided with adaptive algorithms. The more effective and faster they are the larger number of Doppler and ISI the modem can manage. As for RFSM it should be mentioned that now it includes rather efficient adaptive algorithms that work properly at a speed of 600(500) up to 4800(4000) bps (wide/narrow mode). To work at a speed 6400(5333) - 8000() much more compound algorithms are needed. In particular using turbo-equalization will improve noise proof feature at all rates. Therefore OFDM and serial tone modem can be more efficient in dependence on channel statement. In my opinion serial tone modem with effective adaptive algorithms is the most effective. We'd like to mention that under certain circumstances either serial tone or OFDM modem can fail to provide connection, for example, when the Doppler shift is extremely high (polar communications). In that case one should use the methods of spectrum spread that extending the symbol in time and frequency. Unfortunately the speed would not be high in this case. So the best way out is to measure the channel characteristics and choose the speed of transmission and modulation method according to them. The full adaptation of the all characteristics is required. 2. About our users. The project RFSM-2400/8000 was initially aimed at organizations (not for HAMs)! (First version had no 0,3-2,7 band, which is adapted for HAMs). Its prime value is that high-performance algorithm is used in it. Consequently only technical specialists of organizations where data (files, mail etc.) transmission through HF is needed can estimate the program at its true worth. They need the following: high speed of connection and data transmission. They are the FIRS GROUP OF OUR USERS. For example there are organizations (our users at the moment) who even haven't looked upon HAM -modems (little speed, instability, absence of files transmission in spite of excellent chat-exchange). If you are interested in RFSM as in a program for chat- exchange (or even for file transmitting but you do not need a high speed) and runner is not important for you:. You are the SECOND GROUP OF OUR USERS. $60 may be a pretty penny for this product for you. There is also not numerous GROUP OF USERS - THE THIRD ONE The representatives of this group are specialists in HF- radiocommunications and radioamateurs at the same time who is interested in algorithms of a high efficiency - the runner of the program. May be $60 is rather expensive for them but they can trial versions for free. They communicate with us suggesting interesting and moreover useful ideas. We really appreciate their advices and suggestions. Due to the THIRD GROUP the first version of RFSM has transformed in the product adopted for HAM. 3 . There are several remarks on the open source codes. a) RFSM-2400 (and all the more RFSM-8000) is not just a dumb modem though such a rate is also possible (it was used in PSKMail). Our product is an accomplished system of communication thatprovides different types of services including receiving/transmitting e-mail on Internet. b) Speaking about OFDM it should be pointed out that we have got experience in such a kind of modulation and can remark that to construct this modem is incommensurably easier than Serial Tone Modem. But the modem of this kind doesn't compare with RFSM characteristics. If we were not be able to realize Mil-STD correctly and use OFDM in RFSM, we would not be sorry to distribute source codes. c) Philosophy. Professional free software is possible because qualified developer has been grown up by certain company. The buyers have already paid for software and progressive developer as well. Then at the same time free software appears (like RFSM-2400) - like an ad, to create an image or ease consumers' tasks. The fact that software
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... but what it does and how it does. ... And certainly MultiPSK does its stuff WELL ... as a peek at its specs will show you. How about telling us what that 'stuff' is, as you are more familiar than I? Specifics would be nice. It is not the first time that Vista FAILS with an otherwise working software. True, but the applications need to keep up with the operating system, not the other-way-around. That's one of the reasons Windows has so many issues, the demand for backwards compatibility. If Microsoft would just start over, from scratch, and offer no recourse for older apps, then we'd have an O/S closer to what a modern PC can really do. 20 years ago, that would be the kiss-of-death for a company. But as ingrained as Windows O/S is, I imagine it would hardly dent their pocketbook. Anyway, we'll be booting to the Internet before long and what operating system your computer will run will be a moot point. Meanwhile, I can still do many things in seconds that takes even a skilled operator quite a bit longer in a Linux box. (For instance, try setting up dual monitors in Linux!) Yes, Windows isn't the most stable operating system. It is however, the most usable for the masses. No matter how skilled you are at your preferred O/S, you'll more likely sit down to a Windows PC vs any other flavor. Except maybe at your personal station/s. Anyway, that's not really the point here. I'm just trying to nail someone down with specifics of what MultiPSK offers that would make someone reconsider what they're currently using. changing the car controls in a new car model, which requires a new kind of highways. Keeping to the analogy: Besides looking funny, you'd be far behind if you relied on a freeway when the rest of us are driving hovercrafts! Can you correctly guess now what is flawed? I doubt it's a flaw in strictest sense. Just a mis-translation. None of the other digital apps gave an error using the same O/S. Beauty is on the eye of the beholder. And it does not tell the whole truth. No doubt. But layout counts towards usability. I prefer my old boat anchor due to it's signal quality and suburb reception. A newer radio would look nice, but offers little towards the two most important things: TX and RX! Again, no one has given specifics yet to what MultiPSK does better than other digital software? For the most common modes, it translates about as well as any other. What, besides the different modes available and costs, keeps one a die-hard MultiPSK fan? Frank, K2NCC Life is too short for CW, QRP and DOS!
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me personally MultiPSK allows me to enjoy ham radio my way. I like to experiment and be on the edge of new digimode technology and concepts. The learning curve keeps my mind sharp. I can appreciate that! Simon, with HRD, is similar in his approaches. Good support, constant development and new modes, and takes into consideration user opinions. He's added many features based upon for what a forum like this cheers. Meanwhile, as a digimode fan, be sure to check out Roland Prosch's Technical Handbook for Radio Monitoring. It's a book with the best coverage of digital modes I've ever seen. Introduced me to HUNDREDS of digital modes I've never know. Then again, I've only been a ham for a short while! 8) What are some of your favorite, less common modes Sholto? Frank, K2NCC
[digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Kevin O'Rorke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those who complain about the UI really need to go away and use another Program. Sorry Kevin, in this country, our opinions are equal. In theory at least. Those who complain.. don't just get up and leave we bitch about it until someone fixes it! 8) ... as it has all the other digital programs and more. What part of and more do you use most Kevin? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Frank, Here's a rundown of some of the more interesting and maybe offbeat things you can do with MultiPSK that you can't do in other programs: Weak signal modes - There are a variety of interesting modes suitable for weak signal/QRP work. These include a modified version of PSK10. In tests with a channel simulator I have had decode down to -20db S/N. Of course in the real world Doppler would probably limit this to around -18dB S/N. PSKAM10, very slow but can work even further into the noise. VOICE an adapted weak signal mode derived from Olivia that is only 168Hz wide. Seems better than Olivia 8/250 and faster too. This mode also has an audio readout of the character using a voice synthesizer if desired (the idea being invented for blind hams). Automatic ID MultiPSK can send a waterfall picture (actually a type of Hellschreiber) with the name of the mode before transmission. It's possible to see this message in just about any other type of program running a waterfall. RS-ID. Automatic mode recognition and precise frequency tuning. This is another type of ID that is a unique Reed-Solomon MFSK sequence that is transmitted before the main transmission and allows the remote copy of MultiPSK (or PocketDigi now) to home in and choose the right mode automatically. This works down to around -14dB s/n and is extremely useful! Soundcard based ARQ --- MIL-STD-188-141A implementations in normal wide bandwidth or narrow 400Hz bandwidth providing a Fast Acknowledged Exchange ARQ mode for semi-duplex QSO's or transferring emails files. The ALE400 mode as you probably know appears to be a very effective mode for error free QSO's. PAX/PAX-2 similar idea but based on AX25 packet structure and features. MFSK modulation. Regular AX25 packet radio. Not a dumb terminal but a full implementation including an autoresponder, APRS (RX TX) and messaging facility. Commercial Modes Of interest to SWL's mainly perhaps. Decoding of DTMF, HF FAX (including false coloring for satellite pictures), GMDSS transmissions, VHF ACARS, SYNOP/SHIP messages and various other formats. Panoramic Decoders -- Decode up to 23 different PSK31, RTTY or CW signals simultaneously. PC Clock Synchronization Synchronize your PC clock to WWV, CHU etc in real time. Experimental Picture Transmission - Using either narrowband MFSK16 SSTV or a simple digital transmission method in various modes. Probably not that useful but fun to try out. Filters --- Various DSP filters for experimentation including a Binaural CW filter. Wide variety of modes - Many modes not found in other software. Miscellaneous - Spectrum Analyzer Oscilloscope Signal analysis Works with SDR and DSB receivers TCP/IP control TCP/IP POP3 SMTP functions for working with your mail program Programming facility - simple language for special applications. Really there is so much in this program to have fun with! I am sure I have not covered everything in this list. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Tooner wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me personally MultiPSK allows me to enjoy ham radio my way. I like to experiment and be on the edge of new digimode technology and concepts. The learning curve keeps my mind sharp. I can appreciate that! Simon, with HRD, is similar in his approaches. Good support, constant development and new modes, and takes into consideration user opinions. He's added many features based upon for what a forum like this cheers. Meanwhile, as a digimode fan, be sure to check out Roland Prosch's Technical Handbook for Radio Monitoring. It's a book with the best coverage of digital modes I've ever seen. Introduced me to HUNDREDS of digital modes I've never know. Then again, I've only been a ham for a short while! 8) What are some of your favorite, less common modes Sholto? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] MT63 Hardware Question
The EVM56002 - I have one sitting here - not been used since the soundcard programs became available Just type in EVM 56002 to Google Think I still have all of the old software as well Les VK2DSG From: David McGinnis Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:49 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] MT63 Hardware Question I know just about everybody does MT63 on a soundcard. I've done MT63 on a soundcard. The question is: Does anybody know of any hardware (modem type) device out there that does MT63? No soundcard. Dave K7UXO
