|
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
|
