[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Is this an apples-to-apples comparison, with external amps and pre- >> amps added to the D-Star system, as well as appropriate filtering for >> the MUCH broader front-ends on the D-Star rigs, done properly? > > Yes. > >> I'm of the impression that a lot of D-STAR owners are not prior >> repeater owners/operators and wouldn't have a clue how to test the >> "usual" RF things that need to be tested and engineered to get maximum >> performance out of the system. > > The two D-Star/analog system pairings I know of locally are both maintained > by the same respective groups, so I think they know what they're doing.
Fair enough. So you're saying that all else being equal, THEY would believe that their D-STAR systems don't perform as well as their analog? Or is this just your opinion? Care to share who it is? I'd be interested in hearing that straight from them... including all the caveats they might hang on it... "Well, it doesn't perform as well in THIS scenario, but it performs better in THIS scenario..." Especially if they have been running it for a while, they'll have some of those types of opinions, I would think. Like I said earlier though, it just won't ever be exactly the same, and comparisons are difficult even if everything else is 100% equal. Icom themselves won't share information on at what bit-error rate the system falls apart, and without BER testing (hard to do when none of the digital RF test gear understands D-STAR... there IS test gear that understands P25, but it's expen$$$$ive right now)... who knows if Icom even got their digital sections "right". They did NOT get their P25 gear right, as a side-note. Icom P25 gear in encrypted mode doesn't recover correctly when it falls apart, while other rigs listening to the same weak signal will recover. Did the same digital engineers work on both systems? We won't know until someone else builds some D-STAR gear (homebrew or another manufacturer) and head-to-head testing starts happening. Nate WY0X
