Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:48:06 +0100, Tony wrote: > 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 > That is realy nice path test. Can you try few other modes, some more wide like ALE and Q15X25 ? We experimenting a lot with PSK250/500, with or without FEC and your path sim. explains us a lot. Experiments are on 80m band with NVIS antennas and 20-100Km distance. 73! Darko 9A3LI
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
With Tony's permission, PSK63F data is added to the graphs at http://mysite.verizon.net/wz7i/digitalmodes.html Wes, WZ7I www.wz7i.com
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
> The worst case and I see this once, transmission is not > possible in BPSK (or only at very high speeds as 125 bauds or more). > Why not bite the bullet and use PSK125R and pskmail client-to-client arq. It adds an interleaver, is less susceptible to doppler effects and adds full duplex arq at more than PSK31 typing speed and 125 Hz bandwidth. It takes the guessing out of received text and you only type everything 1x... ( NO macros with NAME NAME NAME RST RST RST QTH QTH). It is also a better match for your CW filter. Drawback: it does tranfer your typos without error. Rein PA0R . Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes = 3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall. Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
Hello Phil, Ionospheric Doppler produces fluctuations in the phase of the BPSK transmission. In Multipsk for BPSK, there is an indicator which name is "Quality" (for 1 to 5). It can give an idea of the Doppler: if the signal is strong and the quality is bad, it means that there is some Doppler. The worst case and I see this once, transmission is not possible in BPSK (or only at very high speeds as 125 bauds or more). Signal Quality (Q) A BPSK signal generates 2 phases: 0 and 180 °. More the signal is pure, the more the decoded phase is close to one of these two preceding phases. The average distance to these phases is computed then filtered over 2 seconds. According to the obtained distance, it is given a note between 1 to 5: a.. distance>30 °: Q=1 (very bad), b.. distance between 16 and 30 °:Q=2 (bad), c.. distance between 8 and 16 °: Q=3 (medium), d.. distance between 4 and 8 °: Q=4 (good), e.. distance <4 °: Q=5 (very good). Note: a random signal has an average distance of 45 °. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Phil Williams To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F Demonstrating a suite of digital coding methods are vulnerable to Doppler spread does not tell the whole story. What does the signal look like on the a spectrogram when subjected to Doppler spread? Yes, you have incomplete or scrambled text, but then the root cause of that could be anything. It would be valuable to the community to be able to recognize the presence of Doppler spread by some visual or aural means. Armed with this information then one begins to make choices of other modes that would be less vulnerable to the effects of Doppler spread. philw de ka1gmn On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Tony wrote: Phil, > What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Have a look: Path Simulation: High Latitude (Moderate) Path Delay: 3ms, Doppler spread 10Hz Pangram Text: Quick Brown Fox PSK31FEC t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e e ˆyaooe n o ao t aeepvede n neete ueeeu .tna0 o een it=pctidr a ieae t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e etˆyaooe on oe ne 6etnuEenoel o·b geogtee PSK63F the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog Tony -K2MO - Original Message - From: Phil Williams To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 5:16 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some liberal use of CW shorthand. philw de ka1gmn On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: 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
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
Demonstrating a suite of digital coding methods are vulnerable to Doppler spread does not tell the whole story. What does the signal look like on the a spectrogram when subjected to Doppler spread? Yes, you have incomplete or scrambled text, but then the root cause of that could be anything. It would be valuable to the community to be able to recognize the presence of Doppler spread by some visual or aural means. Armed with this information then one begins to make choices of other modes that would be less vulnerable to the effects of Doppler spread. philw de ka1gmn On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Tony wrote: > > > Phil, > > > What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? > > Have a look: > > Path Simulation: High Latitude (Moderate) > Path Delay: 3ms, Doppler spread 10Hz > Pangram Text: Quick Brown Fox > > > PSK31FEC > > t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e e ˆyaooe n o > ao t aeepvede n neete ueeeu .tna0 o een > it=pctidr a ieae t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e > etˆyaooe on oe ne 6etnuEenoel o·b geogtee > > > PSK63F > > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > > Tony -K2MO > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Phil Williams > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 5:16 AM > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F > > > > Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? > Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some > liberal use of CW shorthand. > > > philw de ka1gmn > > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
Ah! Now that's what I was looking for. Thanks Tony. philw de ka1gmn On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Tony wrote: > > > Phil, > > > What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? > > Have a look: > > Path Simulation: High Latitude (Moderate) > Path Delay: 3ms, Doppler spread 10Hz > Pangram Text: Quick Brown Fox > > > PSK31FEC > > t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e e ˆyaooe n o > ao t aeepvede n neete ueeeu .tna0 o een > it=pctidr a ieae t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e > etˆyaooe on oe ne 6etnuEenoel o·b geogtee > > > PSK63F > > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog > > Tony -K2MO > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Phil Williams > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 5:16 AM > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F > > > > Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? > Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some > liberal use of CW shorthand. > > > philw de ka1gmn > > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > >
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
Phil, > What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Have a look: Path Simulation: High Latitude (Moderate) Path Delay: 3ms, Doppler spread 10Hz Pangram Text: Quick Brown Fox PSK31FEC t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e e ˆyaooe n o ao t aeepvede n neete ueeeu�.tna0 o een it=pctidr a ieae t e tio E ttaeH loo etee- e e etˆyaooe on oe ne 6etnuEenoel o·b geogtee PSK63F the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog Tony -K2MO - Original Message - From: Phil Williams To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 5:16 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some liberal use of CW shorthand. philw de ka1gmn On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: 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
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F + PSKFEC31
Patrick, Thank you for the information. If throughput is one the metrics for this comparision then I clearly see your point. The argument of reduced character set in PSKFEC31 is a little difficult as it looked like Tony was not considering that particular metric as his comparsion include RTTY ;-). 73 es hny philw de ka1gmn On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Patrick Lindecker wrote: > > > Hello Phil, > > According to my measures (under gaussian noise), PSKFEC31 has a minimum S/N > of -14.5 dB (2.5 dB better than PSK63F) but the speed is twice weaker (28 > wpm). It includes a FEC system (bit based) which permits to have a more > robust mode than PSK31 (about 5 times less errors than PSK31), in good > conditions. However, I think PSK63F is more robust than PSKFEC31 in bad > conditions. > Moreover, PSKFEC31 has a reduced set of characters. PSKFEC31 can be > received in a panoramic way (multi reception). > > So to abstract, it is more sensitive and more robust than PSK31, more > sensitive than PSK63F but less robust than this one. > > PSK63F is in all cases better than PSK31. The only advantage of PSK31 is > its smaller bandwidth. > > 73 > Patrick > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Phil Williams > *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Monday, January 04, 2010 11:16 AM > *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F > > Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? > Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of > some liberal use of CW shorthand. > > philw de ka1gmn > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: > >> >> >> 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 >> >> > >
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F + PSKFEC31
Hello Phil, According to my measures (under gaussian noise), PSKFEC31 has a minimum S/N of -14.5 dB (2.5 dB better than PSK63F) but the speed is twice weaker (28 wpm). It includes a FEC system (bit based) which permits to have a more robust mode than PSK31 (about 5 times less errors than PSK31), in good conditions. However, I think PSK63F is more robust than PSKFEC31 in bad conditions. Moreover, PSKFEC31 has a reduced set of characters. PSKFEC31 can be received in a panoramic way (multi reception). So to abstract, it is more sensitive and more robust than PSK31, more sensitive than PSK63F but less robust than this one. PSK63F is in all cases better than PSK31. The only advantage of PSK31 is its smaller bandwidth. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Phil Williams To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some liberal use of CW shorthand. philw de ka1gmn On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: 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
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:14 AM, W6IDS wrote: > > > > > PSK63F is within the STREAM download? I saw references to it in > the reference documentation, but it's unclear to me if it is actually in > the application you download. > > Howard W6IDS > Richmond, IN EM79 > Yep, it is there under "Mode" in the menus in the November 2006 version Version 1.2 Wes, WZ7I
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
PSK63F is within the STREAM download? I saw references to it in the reference documentation, but it's unclear to me if it is actually in the application you download. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79 - Original Message - From: "Tony" To: Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 3:48 AM Subject: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F > 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 >
Re: [digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
Very interesting. What about PSKFEC31 under the same test scenarios? Certainly, there would be more a in throughput, but that is a matter of some liberal use of CW shorthand. philw de ka1gmn On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Tony wrote: > > > 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 > > >
[digitalradio] IZ8BLY's PSK63F
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
