Walt,
I think there is no doubt that this is true. The question I have
been struggling with is how much is enough/too much. I guess what I
am looking for is a curve showing bandwidth vs. throughput for
parallel tone modems, or maybe more precisely where is the point of
diminishing returns?
Mark Miller wrote:
What my question
boils down to is generally, what is the accepted maximum bandwidth of
any signal in the Amateur HF bands, given the finite spectrum and
many interests?
There's the billion [insert local currency here] question. Or
actually two questions: what's the
The maximum accepted bandwidth for most modes is the width of an SSB
transmitter since you can not go wider than that and communicate with
the typical rigs of the day.
We already have the basic modes to work high speeds with good conditions
and slower speeds under difficult conditions. What we
: [digitalradio] USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms for
HamsRe: RFSM2400
Rick,
To me it all depends on the channel behavior. On HF, with multipath,
the parallel modem wins because the symbols can be made longer than
the delay spread.
Just observing the succesful implementations may lead anyone
DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA wrote:
Jose,
This is what I have been saying for a couple of years now.
Se we are not alone.
Research done by independent research laboratories and universities
confirm that the best bet to increase throughput and robustness on HF
channel modems is to
