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

Theory/design choices behind WSJT?

Expand Messages
  • rds_6
    I really appreciate the way K1JT and others have taken a prescriptive download it and get on the air approach to WSJT documentation rather than descriptively
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 10, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I really appreciate the way K1JT and others have taken a
      prescriptive "download it and get on the air" approach to WSJT
      documentation rather than descriptively turning it into a physics
      textbook, but I'd like to try to get my mind around some of the
      design choices behind WSJT. I believe I saw mention that FSK was
      preferable to PSK for dealing with varying phase shifts imparted by
      the dynamic conditions of the medium. However, it seems some non-ham
      meteor burst techniques have settled upon PSK variants. Does their
      typical interrogation and reply approach using receipt of a probe
      packet to initiate transmission of a data packet help them implement
      PSK in a way that's not as practical for hams or is their choice of
      PSK over FSK based on something else? Why 441 baud? Is there some
      optimal baud rate that's high enough to maximize throughput given
      rapid fading yet low enough to minimize multipath from multiple
      meteor trails, various parts of the same meteor trail, wind-sheared
      fragments of a meteor trail, and head echo vs. meteor trail? If so,
      is 441 the optimal baud rate? Was it determined empirically or
      somehow calculated? Having just started to think about meteor
      scatter, none of this to very intuitive for me, so I'd like to read
      up on it.
      Thanks & 73,
      Ross N0GSZ
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.