You are mistaken. SCAMP's inability to work with weak signals
involved data transfer, not busy signal detection. Yes, SCAMP could
only detect a limited set of modes: SSB, CW, PSK, RTTY, PACTOR, and
several other digital modes -- we estimated about 80% of the modes
then in active use!
Assuming no further innovation in busy detection, just incorporating
a SCAMP-style busy detector in today's automatic station control
software would dramatically reduce QRM. What's ridiculous is that
this has yet to be done.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In [email protected], "mulveyraa2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "Dave Bernstein" <aa6yq@>
wrote:
> >
> > The simple rebuttal to this post is "its already been done".
SCAMP
> > demonstrated a highly-effective busy frequency detector running
on a
> > PC and soundcard more than a year ago.
> >
> >
>
> OK, now you're verging into the ridiculous. Especially when
you
> claim something that the SCAMP developers themselves say is not
> currently possible.
>
> You're leaving out the part where is failed to work on anything
> other than a limited set of modes, and required extremely high
signal
> strengths in order to function correctly.
>
> I direct your attention to KN6KB's SCAMP paper from last year.
In
> particular, his statement:
>
> --------------
> 2.10 Busy detector
> The SCAMP protocol contains several mechanisms to help make it a
> friendly neighbor in
> the shared spectrum of amateur radio. One of these mechanisms is a
> busy detector to
> determine when a channel is free to use. Fail-safe busy detectors
for
> all modes of
> operation and modulation schemes are currently beyond the state of
the
> art. However it is
> possible with available DSP techniques to build reasonable
detectors
> for some modes and
> these can significantly reduce possible QRM due to hidden
transmitter
> effects. In
> semiautomatic operation (where a control operator initiates a
> connection to a remote
> automated station) the control operator must of course not rely on
the
> busy detector but
> also listen to insure there is a free channel.
>
> -------------------
>
> Note: "Fail-safe busy detectors for all modes of operation and
> modulation schemes are currently beyond the state of the art."
>
> Note: "it is possible with available DSP techniques to build
> reasonable detectors for some modes and
> these can significantly reduce possible QRM due to hidden
transmitter
> effects"
>
> I.E: It's extremely limited in actual utility, in case that
isn't
> crystal clear.
>
> - Rich
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2pRQfA/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/ELTolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
