Steve, Can you give us some current information on AQC-ALE? I had not been familiar with this term but did a little web surfing and found a very interesting document:
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/2402/DSTO-CR-0214.pdf That covers a rather full spectrum of digital modes, including amateur ones. Curiously, some of the information seems to support my comments a while back about using multiple PSK like tones to come up with a higher speed modem, without having too high a baud rate. Is this still too difficult to implement in software such as the 64 tone with moderate baud rate, can still have a high bps rate. It is interesting to note that many of these modes do not work below + 10 dB S/N. We already have some pretty good speeds with WinDRM types of modulation that effectively using a QAM protocol with significant throughput at somewhat lower than +10. Amateur radio, being very different from commercial/military use of radio, does not typically need a calling system since we do this with the CQ in most any mode. I can see some applications from ALE for emergency use or for personal preference, but it will never be all that popular with the average digital ham that doesn't use it in this manner. I was surprised to see your comment that Pactor and Clover could be used via sound card modems if they were not proprietary. The conventional wisdom is that these modes require a much too fast switching time to implement with non real time computers and even Linux was not able to work well enough with Pactor I to equal a hardware modem. What I do think is very doable is to use the waveforms that we know work, and the techniques that we know work with weaker signals and yet can scale up for improved speeds under good condx, and do this using an ARQ pipelining technique of performing the computer time on the last packet in the background while the next packet is coming through. In fact, this is what I hope will come out of the ARRL's interest in possibly developing a new HF mode(s) for soundcards. 73, Rick, KV9U AAR2EY wrote: > ... the > only threat to ALE is AQC-ALE in my opinion and that's not at all > bad. However most Amateurs that are working with ALE have yet to > realize the full potential of ALE, let alone the potential of AQC-ALE > that is available in PC-ALE. The AQC-ALE performance advantages over > ALE are amazing, however its use leaves 99% of the ALE hardware users > out in the cold as AQC-ALE is only to be found in the latest, most > expensive equipments, thus having it available in PC-ALE is just to > state of the art. > > As a licensed Radio Amateur for nearly 30 years and an SWL for about > 15 years before that, its been my observation that the Amateur Radio > Service if nothing else, adapts to technology that serves the Amateur > Radio Service best. I see ALE, especially in the U.S., becoming more > important to the Amateur Radio Service due to the large move underway > by the U.S. Government in the use of ALE within Federal circles and > those that serve and communicate with them down to the State level > and below, thus expect to see RACES and ARES become more ALE active > in the near future, the hand writing is clearly on the wall. > > In general there is great potential for the application of ALE within > the Amateur Radio Service, especially in the areas of ECOM and HF > e-mail networks and other follow on activity in my opinion. In > addition, due to the nature of Amateur Radio and today's and future > PC Sound Device Modem (PCSDM) based tools, advances can take place at > a much faster pace in areas that would not be seen in the hardware > Modem/TNC world where the rules of government licensing bodies around > the world do not limit such advances such as in the U.S. with the > FCC. Those that want to pursue the developing the PCSDM path of ALE > systems operation simply need to choose the proper system components > to do so if they are not already in place, many older and certain > newer radio and computer equipments are just not up to the task for > various reasons. > > ALE was developed originally to be hardware based and to a set of > Federal and Military standards and as many Amateurs use such hardware > based systems, an effort needs to be made to be backward compatible > with said systems in my opinion. However that should not mean that > advances for Amateur Radio use such as FAE ARQ by F6CTE in MultiPSK > should be held off do to existing limitations in any areas of ALE > systems in use. Users of ALE must choose their method of ALE and all > system components, with ALE hardware systems the application of 3rd > party tools for follow on DLP activity is very common, aside from AMD > some hardware ALE systems provide DTM and some DTM and DBM, use can > also be made of the PCSDM based or TNC/Modem based DLP, its just a > matter of tying the systems together to maintain the ALE linked state > by monitoring the follow on activity state status. The use of AMD is > the common denominator in the ALE world simply because the bulk of > all ALE hardware modem/controllers only offer AMD, however that is > not the case in the PCSDM based ALE world and bridging the two worlds > for the follow on DLP is all that is required, its up to the user > base to choose what their standard follow on DLP choice(s) are for > interoperability. In the Military ALE world its usually > MIL-STD-188-110 modem based with one or more waveforms that are used > for follow on, in the U.S. Government world its usually a commercial > TNC/Modem using Clover, GTOR or PACTOR I, which along with other > proprietary protocols (some on MIL-STD-188-110x modem) is the case > with other Governments, Para-Military, some 3rd World Militaries as > well Commercial users. The question to be answered in the Amateur > Radio world is what shall become the follow on ARQ protocol > standard(s)? For FSK modems my vote is DBM ARQ, FAE ARQ, GTOR and > PACTOR I as the main choices, as to higher speed modems the situation > is less clear due to existing rules in many countries, especially in > the U.S., however the MIL-STD-188-110x modem is an obvious choice, as > are the newer CLOVER and PACTOR x modes which could all be > implemented via the PCSDM as well as via hardware if they were not > proprietary. > > /s/ Steve, N2CKH > >
