Hi Matthew,
Well, I try not to look to much at that radio or else I might have to find yet another excuse if my wife asks me why I need "yet another radio". (I just bought a 2m/4m portable and a "modified CB" station to monitor our new local 10 meter repeater one week ago). :-) Anycase, the goal is to have a something so that people can experiment with it with as less hardware requirements as possible. My preference would be just a basic radio interface board and a couple of USB audio-fobs that are known to work well. We first need to gain some experience with this. What modes or speeds work best, etc. I also had a request of somebody to think of possible issues to use this over satellite links. That's also an interesting thing to look at. 73 Kristoff - ON1ARF On 20-05-12 16:38, Matthew Pitts wrote: > Kristoff, > > Sounds good, and I knpw of a transceiver that we could use this with that > will be available later this year. In fact, we could do something a bit more > complex, as far as coding and it should easily handle it. > > http://www.nwdigitalradio.com > > Matthew Pitts > N8OHU > > > > ------------------------------ > On Sun, May 20, 2012 10:24 AM EDT Kristoff Bonne wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >> We are looking into the possibility to create an additional modem for >> codec2, but for VHF/UHF frequencies. >> >> As a first "proof-of-concept", this would be to convert my gmsk modem to >> a new format to carry codec2 voice. This would have the advantage that >> the hardware requirement to run this would be minimal. >> >> >> >> Sofar, I see two options: >> - A 2400 bps modem: >> This would be quite sufficient to contain codec2 voice (at 1400 bps), >> additional syncronication patterns + some additional data and even an >> options 2/3 FEC for the voice part. >> >> - A 4800 bps modem: >> This would then give even more headroom, e.g. tu use a 1/3 FEC for voice >> (which would make it much more robust) and still have headroom for >> syncronisation patterns and some additional data >> >> >> >> The 2400 bps modem would have the advantage of the lower bandwidth >> (better S/N ratio, better suited for e.g. bands with limited bandwidth: >> 10 meter, 4 meter). >> The 4800 bps modem would have the advantage of the better FEC. >> >> >> Does anybody have a comments on this? >> >> >> >> 73 >> Kristoff - ON1ARF >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Freetel-codec2 mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Freetel-codec2 mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
