Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
This is interesting in light of all the claims by WinLink and ALE aficianados that that comprehensive signal-detection is 'impossible'. 73 DE Charles, N5PVL - Original Message - From: Ed Hekman To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 3:30 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE! I was monitoring PSK on 20 meters today with DM780 V5.0 Beta when a window pops up in the lower right corner of the screen that says, MFSK32 transmission on 2632 Hz. Click here to select. I had never heard of MFSK32 before so I clicked on the window and immediately found KN4SA calling CQ. I responded and we had a nice QSO in a new mode I had never heard of before. The speed was just about right for us but I was very surprised when he sent a picture of his 2 element quad embedded in the message. Later while monitoring Olivia 16/500 the window popped up again saying, Olivia 16/500 transmission on 1650 Hz. Click here to select. I could see nothing on the waterfall and could not hear anything but when I hit the select option I found VK2AYD calling CQ right in the middle of the waterfall. A few minutes later after turning the antenna around in his direction we connected and had a very nice QSO. I am convinced of the value (need) for using RSID for the less recognizable modes. Now I need an SDR radio with 96KHz bandwidth. - Hi Great ideas and implementation, Patrick, Simon and others. I am hooked. Ed WB6YTE --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote: I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking. Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Tony I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch on. Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
FWIW SSTV has been using VIS (slightly similar) for ~ 10 years or so, maybe more. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Charles Brabham This is interesting in light of all the claims by WinLink and ALE aficianados that that comprehensive signal-detection is 'impossible'.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
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
Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
The difference here is that a helper signal has been added, same as with SSTV, but which is only sent at the start of the transmission. That is essentially different from the raw, bare signal with no ID. A new situation, to be fair. 73, Jose, CO2JA Simon (HB9DRV) escribió: FWIW SSTV has been using VIS (slightly similar) for ~ 10 years or so, maybe more. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com http://www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - *From:* Charles Brabham mailto:n5...@uspacket.org ** This is interesting in light of all the claims by WinLink and ALE aficianados that that comprehensive signal-detection is 'impossible'. __ Información de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versión de la base de firmas de virus 3832 (20090206) __ ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje. http://www.eset.com Participe en Universidad 2010, del 8 al 12 de febrero de 2010 La Habana, Cuba http://www.universidad2010.cu - SEGUNDO SEMINARIO INTERNACIONAL LEGADO Y DIVERSIDAD. ARQUITECTURA Y URBANISMO. El rescate de los valores urbanos y arquitectónicos en tiempos de globalización Colegio de San Gerónimo, La Habana Vieja, noviembre 24-27, 2009 -
Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
Also, would it not be beneficial to have something like this implemented in the the unattended Pactor stations. A physical convergence layer for all. 73 philw de ka1gmn On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 9:33 AM, aa777888athotmaildotcom aa777...@hotmail.com wrote: You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin. Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with SDR). When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things missing after that are scanning and an automated response. It also appears possible that the software would be capable of automatically choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. This would allow all calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would suggest time synchronized scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve probability of intercept without long or repetitive RSID transmissions. Say 4 second dwell per band to allow a +/-1 second guard band on the timing (given a 2 second RSID transmission length). The occasional collision would be worth the simplicity and reliability. Thanks again, Simon! Scott k*b*l*0*0*q --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote: I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking. Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Tony I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch on. Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector.
RE: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
You don't know if an instantaneously empty spot on the waterfall is truly empty until you send QRL? and receive no response, or monitor it long enough to have heard both sides of a QSO if one were in progress. Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com]on Behalf Of aa777888athotmaildotcom Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 10:34 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE! You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin. Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with SDR). When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things missing after that are scanning and an automated response. It also appears possible that the software would be capable of automatically choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. This would allow all calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would suggest time synchronized scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve probability of intercept without long or repetitive RSID transmissions. Say 4 second dwell per band to allow a +/-1 second guard band on the timing (given a 2 second RSID transmission length). The occasional collision would be worth the simplicity and reliability. Thanks again, Simon! Scott k*b*l*0*0*q --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote: I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking. Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Tony I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch on. Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE!
Hello Scott, At the present time, there is a sort of SELCAL called Call ID (RS ID extension). However there is no protocol around it. It's just some information about the Ham (Call sign, Locator...) which pops up on the waterfall. More about Call ID: http://f6cte.free.fr/The_Call_ID_and_Prop_ID_easy_with_Multipsk.doc given a 2 second RSID transmission length 1.4 seconds precisely. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: aa777888athotmaildotcom aa777...@hotmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 4:33 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: More RSID - PLEASE! You know what's really exciting? We are a hop, skip and jump away from a powerful, lightweight ALE implementation that would probably outperform MIL-STD-188-141A by a large margin. Right now the code scans an entire 3KHz bandwidth for RSID (or more with SDR). When you add in the future, planned SELCAL feature the only things missing after that are scanning and an automated response. It also appears possible that the software would be capable of automatically choosing an empty spot on the waterfall to make the call. This would allow all calls to occur simultaneously and therefore I would suggest time synchronized scanning a la JT65 or WSPR in order to improve probability of intercept without long or repetitive RSID transmissions. Say 4 second dwell per band to allow a +/-1 second guard band on the timing (given a 2 second RSID transmission length). The occasional collision would be worth the simplicity and reliability. Thanks again, Simon! Scott k*b*l*0*0*q --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Simon \(HB9DRV\) simon.br...@... wrote: I think it'll take up to a year - then we'll be rocking. Also when we use SDR more there will be a big improvement. Simon Brown, HB9DRV www.ham-radio-deluxe.com - Original Message - From: Tony I think we're making progress with RSID Dave, it's just slow to catch on. Have a look at the RSID video in the file section of this reflector. Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Recommended digital mode software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk Logging Software: DXKeeper or Ham Radio Deluxe. Yahoo! Groups Links
