Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5295 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2000 00:27:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by dimple.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 29 Jan 2000 00:27:06 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12EH7E-0002DE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:31:32 +0000 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12EH7D-0002D9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:31:31 +0000 Received: from [195.44.140.218] (helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12EH76-0005j2-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:31:25 +0000 Message-ID: <3891ED5C.713528D2@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:26:20 +0000 From: "g3kev" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Transatlantic References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Klaus von der Heide wrote: > Hello LF-Friends, > > the negative result of the recent transatlantic experiment only says > that the usual ham methods for LF contacts are not adequate for a > transatlantic distance. A weak signal never excludes information > transmission, it only reduces the information bit rate. Why not try, > as a first step, to get one single bit over the ocean? > The communication theory says that BPSK is optimum, and a > bandwidth considerably larger than the information bit rate is better > than a small one. > > I therefore, propose the following experiment: > > 1. Both, transmitter and receiver, must be synchronized to an > atomic clock, i.e. all oscillators that determine the carrier > or the symbol rate. Especially the sampling frequency of > a DSP (not the processor clock) must be synchronized. > A soundcard normally cannot. > > 2. The symbol rate is exactly 1 bit/s. Starting every minute, > a constant random pattern of 60 bits is sent out. > Appropriate matched filters must be used at both ends. > > 3. At the receiving end, a DSP adds the 60 new values to > 60 accumulators. > > 4. The contents of the accumulators is correlated with the > known random bit pattern. After many hours or days > (or years?) the correlation must become significant. > > 5. It is important to suppress the non-Gaussian noise as > good as possible before the data are accumulated. > > As I mentioned some weeks ago, phased array antennas > at both ends would increase the signal by many dBs. > There isn't any dought that hams can cross information > over the atlantic. The minimum information of a ham QSO > is 50 bits in either direction. The open questions only is: > Is the possible information bit rate 1 bit per day or is it > 1 bit per 5 minutes or in other words: can a QSO run > within 10 hours or can it definitely not. > > 73 de Klaus, DJ5HG Good idea Klaus. let me know when you want to start. But would it not be more simple to send some slow dashes on a specific frequency . Each amateur participating would have a time slot. Amateur 1 on the hour commences dashes of an agreed on/off period for 5 minutes. Then a silent period of 5 minutes to avoid confusion with the next participant. Amateur 2 starts at H+10 for 5 minutes then 5 minutes silence Amateur 3 " H+20 for 5 minutes then 5 minutes silence etc Time needs to be fairly accurate but no atomic standard is necessary and all would conform to the same dash duration and off period. Callsign at normal speed for ID purposes sent immediately after the 5 min acty period. Keep it simple. de G3KEV