Re:BPSK31 or MT63?
- KC7WW's test of PSK31 and MT63-1K and MT63-2K
(http://www.johanforrer.net/hfpsk.htm) shows that MT63-2kHz, double interleave
factor. Test at -5dB SNR, 3kHz Bandwidth AWGN was considerly better than PSK-31
tested at -10dB SNR.
Richard, G4HPE, wrote a paper, which is on the RSGB web site under emergency
Greenman Family wrote:
> The weak signal performance of PSK31 is better than MT63. However, you
> should also consider DominoEX, which although wider than PSK31, has
> similar sensitivity to BPSK31. Better still, it has excellent typing
> speed and very easy tuning.
> DominoEX8 achieves 55 WPM at similar S/N to BPSK31, and has a tuning
> tolerance of about 100Hz. Using good software (such as ZL2AFP DominoEX)
> you can read signals down to -15dB S/N and see them well enough to tune
> on the waterfall display at -18dB S/N. The optional FEC actually works
> (gives about 1-2dB improvement, more under impulse noise), at the cost
> of halving the typing speed.
> Don't be fooled by the fact that you can copy MT63 signals you can't
> hear. It's not surprising, since the signal sounds like noise. It's easy
> to confirm with a simulator that BPSK31 and DominoEX (even MFSK16) have
> the edge.
> It's a different matter when there are ionospheric effects, and there
> MT63 has some advantages. But that's not what you asked about.
> You can read about DominoEX at www.qsl.net/ zl1bpu/DOMINO
> Murray ZL1BPU