[FADCA] Transmittal speed
Stacey & Bob H.
[email protected]
Mon, 17 Feb 2003 19:56:35 -0500
Bud wrote:
>The HF transfer of the 32K message was done on PacTOR 3. The link to
WB5KSD
>in Dallas was good and the transmission speed reached an indicated 3200BPS
>for most of the file transfer.
How does 3200bps compare to the 300baud limit?
Thanks on the usage question Rick.
Bob N4WFH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Muething" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 19:46
Subject: RE: [FADCA] Transmittal speed
> Bob,
>
> 300 baud is the maximum rate for packet on HF and that turns out to be
about
> 1.5KHz wide. Pactor 1 runs 100-200 bits per second and about 350 Hz wide.
> Pactor 2 runs from 200 to 800 bits per second and is 500 Hz wide. Pactor 3
> Runs 200 - 3600 bits per second and is up to 2.2 KHz wide. Speed for all
> pactor is adjusted automatically to best fit conditions.
>
> A note: There is consideration by the ARRL and FCC in future band
planning
> that may minimize or perhaps ban 300 Baud HF packet at least on some HF
> bands. This mode is inefficient in bandwidth vs error-free bits
delivered.
>
> 73,
>
> Rick KN6KB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Stacey & Bob H.
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 1849 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [FADCA] Transmittal speed
>
>
> That answered it. Looks like I will go right to Pactor III. I had heard
that
> the maximum speed on HF is 300b is that true or is it for some bands?
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob N4WFH
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bud thompson" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 11:17
> Subject: Re: [FADCA] Transmittal speed
>
>
> > Bob:
> >
> > The HF transfer of the 32K message was done on PacTOR 3. The link to
> WB5KSD
> > in Dallas was good and the transmission speed reached an indicated
3200BPS
> > for most of the file transfer. PacTOR modes are adaptive and change
rates
> > depending on throughput/conditions. Once the transfer started, my
Airmail
> > screen indicated it would take less than one minute. (<1 min)
> >
> > The upper rates of PacTOR 3 require a 2.4KHz bandwidth. It is a
multi-tone
> > mode, not just two-tone M/S.
> >
> > PacTOR 2 can attain up to 800BPS and PacTOR 1 maxes out at 200BPS. Both
> are
> > only two-tone M/S modes and work within a 500Hz bandwidth.
> >
> > 3200 is the max rate for PacTOR 3. It steps down from there to 2800,
1400,
> > (1200?), 800, 600, 200 - ( think that is the progression) depending on
> > conditions. Most of the PacTOR 3 links on my WL2K are 1400 or
greater...
> Of
> > course I don't know this unless I'm watching which isn't all the time.
> After
> > almost two months of WL2K operation now, I'd estimate that 15 percent of
> the
> > P3 transfers are at max speed, 60 percent at the next step down. This is
> on
> > any band 40,30,20, 17,and 15M where I allow P3 connects. My regular
users
> > are at distances from 100 miles to more than 3500 miles. In January I
had
> a
> > regular user while he took a week or more crossing the Indian Ocean in
his
> > sailboat, but he was using PacTOR 2.
> >
> > My stats show that since Jan 1 about 40-45% of the connects are PacTOR
3,
> > 35% PacTOR 2 and the rest PacTOR 1.
> >
> > I assume the rate that is shown on my screen during the transfers is the
> > ASCII transfer rate, so the effective throughput would be faster yet
> > depending on how much compression is being used. At a 40% compression, a
> > 3200 rate would be 1.4x that much effective or nominally 5KB. I also
> assume
> > the posted rate is the actual transmission rate which would have to be
> > reduced when the effective rate is determined as these are QRQ modes,
not
> > full duplex.
> >
> > Of course the 80 seconds on my transfer to Dallas included all the
> > systematic overhead as well.
> >
> > Rick KN6KB can weigh in here to straighten out any kinks I just made.
> >
> > bud
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "Are you still wasting your time with spam?...
> > There is a solution!"
> >
> > Protected by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector
> > The most powerful anti-spam software available.
> > http://www.giantcompany.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stacey & Bob H." <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 09:49
> > Subject: [FADCA] Transmittal speed
> >
> >
> > > Bud Wrote:
> > >
> > > Yesterday I sent a ham-to-e-mail message with two attachments. One was
> an
> > MS
> > > Word file (a 30K binary file), the other a small DOS.txt file. The
> actual
> > > text in the e-mail message was only a reference to the testing. The
> total
> > > e-mail message was just over 32Kbytes. From my home Airmail set up in
> > > Deltona on 20M I linked with WB5KSD, a frequency/band scanning WL2K
> > station
> > > near Dallas, TX. I got lucky and made the link in about 15 seconds -
it
> > > would have taken 45 seconds had I missed his scanning the frequency
the
> > > first time. Once linked the entire 32K message was sent and we were
> > > disconnected in about 80 seconds. I then walked across the shack about
> 10
> > > ft to my XYL's computer and the e-mail message was in her in folder.
> > >
> > > Bob: Bud at what baud rate did you pass a 32k file in 80sec? At 1200
> baud
> > it
> > > would approximately 9 minutes.
> > >
> > > Bob N4WFH
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > FADCA mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FADCA mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
>
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
>
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca