| |
VE2HAR > MT63 15.03.05 18:03l 184 Lines 5155 Bytes #-7297 (0) @ WW
BID : 8097SENTTO
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: [MT63]
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0EA<DB0RES<ON0AR<VA2HAR<VE2HAR
Sent: 050315/1638z @:VE2HAR.#MTL.QC.CAN.NOAM Laval #:42795 $:8097sentto
Any file will do as long as everyone is using it...and of course, the fi=
le
should be distributed on this list.
Walt/K5YFW
> Hi Walt, I agree we need to define our text that we send, the amount=20
> of bytes that are sent and then have a method to check the number of=20
> errors. The size can be more than 3 Kbytes but no larger is better. The=
=20
> text can be anything but it must conform with the ASCII text format. Th=
e=20
> test text must be sent to this list so everyone that is interested can=20
> get the accurate file. In linux you can check both files by knowing=20
> there total byte size. If they are the same, it's perfect. You get the=20
> byte size with ls -al.
>=20
> Using the Linux gMFSK I can send the test file directly with clicking=20
> File and then Send file. When I receive the test file I can simply cut=20
> it out of my lof file. I have my system set to log everything. Fun to=20
> look at later.
>=20
> I have a file we can use. It is the ARRL bandplan. It is way too long=20
> but I will cut it down to about 3,000 words.
>=20
> karl
>=20
>=20
> dubose@texas.net wrote:
>=20
> >Thanks to Patrick, F6IN, for bringing PathSim to our attention. This =
is truly a
> >nice application.
> >
> >Building on what I believe Tomi or others have said, as well as my own=
thoughts
> >about having a "test" file. Also, looking at G4HPE's papers found at
> >http://www.rsgb.org/emergency/datamodesinfo.htm . And not to be left =
out, my
> >several E-Mails with Charles, G4GUO.
> >
> >Back in Jan/Feb of 1990, the US TRANSCON began "testing", on-the-air, =
HF
> >transmissions of a file which became their standard. It was a 40KB f=
ile. The
> >modes being used were the MIL-STD-188-110 type. These were interestin=
g test.=20
> >The MD5 sum was used on each received file to verify that its was the =
same as
> >the original file. Throughput and accuracy were important.
> >
> >G4HPE in his paper "A PRACTICAL EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF SOME MODE=
RN DATA
> >MODES" (http://www.rsgb.org/emergency/articles/datmodes2.pdf) Richard =
speak of
> >the test he did on MT63 and MFSK16.
> >
> >Also, on page 17 of Rick=92s, KN6KB, presentation to the DCC last Sept=
ember
> >(2004), he shows throughput using an HF channel simulator from KC7WW=92=
s Oregon
> >Software Factory.
> >
> >G4HPE=92s test concluded that MT63 had a throughput of 200 WPM at a =96=
5 dB SNR on a
> >poor CCIR Channel. KN6KB=94s results for Pactor II/III indicate a sim=
ilar (if not
> >lower) throughput under the same signal conditions.
> >
> >While I do not doubt these findings, I believe that as some in this gr=
oup are
> >very technical, we need to develop a standard method of testing variou=
s new
> >modes under varying conditions using Moe Wheatley=92s, AE4JY, PathSim.
> >
> >Here is my suggestion.
> >
> >1) Create/develop a standard file of at least 400 words (5 characters =
one space
> >per word, 6 bytes =852.4KBPs).
> >
> >2) Generate this file in the mode to be tested and store it electronic=
ally on a
> >computer hard drive, CD or other magnetic storage media.
> >
> >3) =93Play=94 this file through the AE4JY=92s PathSim application at t=
he following HF
> >Simulation parameters:
> >
> >
> >
> > CCIR 520-2 Conditions SRN (in dB)
> > Good Conditions +10 +5 0 -5
> > Moderate Conditions +10 +5 0 -5
> > Poor Conditions +10 +5 0 -5
> > Flutter fading +10 +5 0 -5
> > Low-latitude quite +10 +5 0 -5
> > Low-latitude disturbed +10 +5 0 -5
> > Mid-latitude quite +10 +5 0 -5
> > Mid-latitude disturbed +10 +5 0 -5
> > High-latitude quite +10 +5 0 -5
> > High-latitude disturbed +10 +5 0 -5
> >
> >4) Record output or =93play=94 it through the mode detector and captur=
e the output.
> >
> >
> >5) With software techniques to manually determine the throughput at ea=
ch signal
> >condition.
> >
> >6) Document the results and provide the results to interested parties.
> >
> >I realize that this is just a rough draft of a testing process but th=
ink its is
> >within the capability of a number of list members and the results migh=
t be VERT
> >INTERESTING.
> >
> >You comments solicited.
> >
> >Thanks & 73,
> >
> >Walt/K5YFW
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ><< Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
> >
> >- The MT63 Reflector -
> > MT63@egroups.com
> >
> >(To unsubscribe. send email to
> >MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
> >=20
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >=20
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =20
> >
>=20
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->=20
Music that listens to you.
LAUNCHcast. What's in your mix?
http://us.click.yahoo.com/8mKGzA/FARHAA/kkyPAA/CPMolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->=20
<< Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
- The MT63 Reflector -
MT63@egroups.com
(To unsubscribe. send email to
MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
=20
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MT63/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
MT63-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
=20
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
