|
Hi LF
Since by general consent the
600m band is now wide open for experimentation of whatever computer aided
mode that can be down loaded for free off the Internet. Might I suggest the
use of SSTV. They say a picture is worth a 1000 words. I have thousands of holiday
snaps I would like to share with the world by way of a 24/7 beaconing
experiment. The result may be a bit more interesting than the shopping
lists of stations worked, equipment lists and rig specifications that get
churned out ad nauseam over the weekends.
I am not sure what my afore
mentioned local Amateur Radio 600m op friends would feel being only a few
miles away from my QTH.
No, the above suggestion is
ridiculous. It does however, Einstein, Planck et al withstanding, beg the
question; what is a suitable maximum bandwidth for the development of new
modes on our British 3Kc/s 600m band? I will start the ball rolling by
saying a BW no more than 50c/s. G3PLX managed with less than 32c/s BW. Since
there is a QSB / QRN issue on this band then hand shaking could be introduced
to ensure error free data transfer a bit like X25 slow but sure yet confined
in a very narrow bandwidth say 50c/s max. We need to think outside the
box and not try to shoe horn unsuitable modes onto 600m. To evoke names like
Planck and co with all due respect to Alberto (who I admire immensely for his
great innovations with DSP, SDR, FFT processing software) I think, is
over the top. Nobody is into book burning and denial of spectrum to impede
progress but we only have 3kc/s to play with here in the UK. I consider
myself a “grunt” operator not a highflying “Einstein” radio spectrum quantum
mechanic, but I would hope we are trying to do more with less and I don’t
think Olivia is the answer. Whatever modes are proposed and developed, I
would expect one of the cardinal points in their specification, along with
very narrow BW, to be compatibility with adjacent modes like CW and the
effect on adjacent stations not running that particular mode.
In the mean time I am hoping to
improve my manual CW skills assuming there are any stations still interested
in that form of error correcting narrow band data transfer and are still
prepared to QSO with me.
Now retreating into my cave with
my knuckles dragging along the ground.
Vy 73 petefmt
--- On Mon, 5/1/09, Alberto di Bene <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Alberto di Bene
<[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: Silent majority
To: [email protected]
Date: Monday, 5 January, 2009, 12:05 AM
Steve McDonald wrote: >> There is virtually nothing new to discover or invent that has not already >> taken place on MF. > > There you go guys. You may as well stop your 600m experiments right now as > Mal has proclaimed that there is "nothing new to discover". Wouldn't it be > wonderful if we could all see the future as clearly as he apparently does. > What an amazing gift. > > VE7SL / Steve This reminds me what Max Planck did write at the beginning of past century. At the turn of the 20th century scientists were absolutely certain that there was nothing more to be discovered in theoretical physics. Max Planck, recalling the mood of optimism and conviction at that time, wrote: “When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Phillipp von Jolly... he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed almost fully matured science.... Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries”. The history of physics during the 20th century did show how dumb was that point of view... 73 Alberto I2PHD |
