Extended message and RS ID #Multipsk

Patrick Lindecker
 

Hello Sholto,

 

>MultiPSK has a tcp/ip interface. It might be possible to use a custom application for RS-ID QNI?

Yes, the reception of a RS/ID (in a 44 KHz bandwidth maximum) is sent to the TCP/IP link (as the form of a comment) .

Note: QNI worth for what?

 

>I wonder if simultaneously received RS-ID symbols (separated by frequency) would be decoded? This would help a lot to overcome any doubling which is a common problem.

For RSID, strictly simultaneous no (it would be a very rare event).

However for EM, it can be received any number of extended messages (EM) strictly simultaneously, as it is programmed for.

 

73

Patrick

 

 

De : main@digitalradio.groups.io [mailto:main@digitalradio.groups.io] De la part de Sholto Fisher
Envoyé : vendredi 3 mai 2019 02:45
À : main@digitalradio.groups.io
Objet : Re: [digitalradio] #WSJTX FT4 for NBEMS nets ?

 

MultiPSK has a tcp/ip interface. It might be possible to use a custom application for RS-ID QNI?

 

I wonder if simultaneously received RS-ID symbols (separated by frequency) would be decoded? This would help a lot to overcome any doubling which is a common problem.

 

73

Sholto

K7TMG

 


From: main@digitalradio.groups.io <main@digitalradio.groups.io> on behalf of Tony <DXDX@...>
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 5:10:35 PM
To: main@digitalradio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] #WSJTX FT4 for NBEMS nets ?

 

Andy:

 

The Extended Messaging feature in Multipsk would certainly speed-up the check-in process. It takes a few seconds to pass along ones status and call sign. The RS-ID protocol has plenty of sensitivity for the weaker check-ins as well.   


Check-ins would pop-up in both the waterfall and EM Window which is pretty convenient for the net control operator. 

 

Tony -K2MO

 

 

 

On 4/30/2019 10:45 AM, Andrew OBrien wrote:

Me , again. On my old topic of faster/easier net call-up methods.  As you may remember I think many NBEMS Olivia nets take FAR too long checking in stations (20 minutes of checking in, two minutes for net content ) . I did consider FSQcall and JS8Call as offering a better way to start an NBEMS net before switching to Olivia and FLAMP methods for traffic sending. Now I'm wondering if FT4 , or even FT8, offer something more efficient?  Both FT4 and FT8 offer the ability for Net Control to simultaneously detect stations checking in  over a 3 Khz range. Plenty of bandwidth for 20-30 NBEMS stations to check in and be "spread out" .  With FT4 , checking in could be done via a couple of 4.5 second cycles , with FT8 , 12 seconds. I'm also wondering about the "Fox and Hound" setting in FT8 (not implemented in FT4 at the  moment) and whether this could be used by a NCS to quickly acknowledge, en masse, the stations checking in. With WSJT-X and Fldigi open at same time. WSJT FT modes could be used to check in all stations within a minute and then use TX RSID in Fldigi (or Multipsk) to send traffic in the more  traditional, speedier, robust, digital modes.

 

Andy K3UK 

 




Avast logo

L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
www.avast.com


Join main@digitalradio.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.