Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2293Re: [MT63] Re: MT63 is Fantastic

Expand Messages
  • Walt DuBose
    Apr 10, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Brian Carling wrote:
      >
      > On 9 Apr 2004 at 21:28, Walt DuBose wrote:
      >
      > > The ARRL Board of Directors will consider re-defining the joint
      > > mission of ARES and NTS in its emergency communications roles in
      > > addition to the application of Winlink 2000 technology which uses
      > > Pactor.
      >
      > My guess is you need fancy equipment for those chirpy modes,
      > unlike MT63 which can run on an inexpensive computer with
      > a soundcard...
      >
      > A pity that ARRL wants things to go that direction, but I guess everything has its
      > place!
      >
      
      Well for Pactor I and II, some "TNCs" such as made by Kantronics will
      run Pactor I and II. But Pactor I and II aren't nearly as robust as
      MT63 even though Pactor II is high speed with a goof SNR. (A good SNR is
      generally considered to be + 10 dB. MT63 works the same with a +10 dB
      SNR as it doesn at a 0 dB SNR).

      Pactor III is admittedly much higher speed than MT63 but again that is
      with a good SNR...there are no measurements published concerning its
      performance at a 0 dB SNR.

      The lowest priced Pactor hardware device with Pactor III license ($149
      US)
      is about $800.

      If you feel that the ARRL should not adopt Pactor III and WinLink (which
      only runs on Microsoft operating systems and is NOT open source), you
      might think about contacting your ARRL Division Director when the board
      publishes the report.

      Walt/K5YFW
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic