All, Recent path simulation tests indicate that Nino Porcino's PSK63F offers better performance over PSK31 and PSK63 in a couple of areas. The most significant improvement is it's ability to endure Doppler spread found on paths that cross the polar ionosphere. Both PSK31 and PSK63 fail miserably in this area; see high-lat test samples below.
Path Simulation: High Latitude (Moderate) Path Delay: 3ms, Doppler spread 10Hz Pangram Text: Quick Brown Fox PSK63F -- the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog PSK63 -- mev roe tt#dtorl|f- bn ô mp e o ihe Fzy dg PSK31 -- nls oSer Òe naAeta qlipM h nV o T rn agâ o RTTY -- TH QACKH492, FOJUMP OR THTLAZY G Sensitivity-wise, it's quite a bit more sensitivity than PSK63, but only marginally better than PSK31. Although it's speed is about 25% faster than PSK31, it's about 40% slower than PSK63. Average wmp rate seems to be 63 wpm for PSK63F. Lowest S/N (sensitivity) PSK63F -12db PSK63 -7db PSK31 -11db RTTY -5db Additional path tests indicate that PSK31 and PSK63F perform about the same under moderate mid-latitude conditions (CCIR fading channel). Tests show that PSK31 and PSK63F will outperform PSK63 when signals are weak under quiet conditions since they both have greater sensitivity. It would be interesting to hear from our HF digital friends up north who experience the distorting effects of the polar ionosphere on a regular basis; this is where the PSK63F mode can be put to the test. Available software: Nino Porcino's Stream -- http://xoomer.virgilio.it/aporcino/ Patrick Lindeckers Multipsk -- http://f6cte.free.fr/index_anglais.htm (thanks for including PSK63F Patrick) Tony, K2MO
