RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] RTTY

To: RTTY Contesting <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] RTTY
From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:16:22 -0700
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On Mar 21, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Gary AL9A wrote:

> "Some programs rely on the the UART "buffer full" signal for proper PTT 
> timing and drop PTT (unkey) when the UART buffer is empty..."

Wow, some programs are really slow enough that they cannot keep up? (Remember, 
all you need to do is to keep up with the RTTY character rate, not the bit 
rate.)

I remember when I encountered the FSK interface of the microKeyer for the first 
time (on Mac OS X, you have to write everything yourself, so you end up knowing 
all the nitty gritty of the stuff you use :-) .  One of the obvious things is 
that the only way to interface to a MicroHAM keyer properly is to use its FIFO 
as a single character buffer and use a high priority thread to feed characters 
to it whenever the single character FIFO is empty.  As long as the thread wakes 
up and sends the next character within 150 ms there is no extra delay.  150 ms 
is an eternity as far as modern computers are concerned.  The microKeyer has a 
multi-character FIFO, but you cannot really use more than one character since 
there is no way to "flush" characters that are sent ahead to the FIFO. 

> I checked MMTTY and on the Decode tab the StopLength 
> item selected is "Rx=1bit, Tx=1.5bit".  I changed this to "1bit" and tried 
> the same test exchange - 8:68 seconds!  My exchange was set up with spaces 
> between the elements as "RST NR TIME NR TIME.  I changed that to have a "-" 
> in between the elements so that now it is RST-NR-TIME-NR-TIME.  The test 
> exchange time is now down to 8:05 seconds!  That's 2:39 seconds off the 
> orginal exhange time!

Uh oh, I might have turned Gary into a microsecond counting monster :-)

BTW, you have to weigh the time saved by using the dashes against the 
probability that the receiver gets an error hit within the first group of 
NR-TIME that causes one of the characters to turn into the LTRS shift Baudot 
code.  If that happens, you *may* be asked to repeat the entire exchange 
(experienced RTTY ops won't be fazed by it).  So you need to weigh the repeats 
against the savings that you have accrued.  Probabilistically, I myself would 
pick using dashes over using spaces between numbers. 

While you are shaving microseconds, here is another hint... the microKeyers and 
digiKeyers also suffer from the fact that its FSK interface cannot achieve 
45.45 baud (if you use the Mac you'd already know this since it is in the 
documentation for µH Router :-).  The software has to choose either 45 baud or 
46 baud.  

So, if you are a crazed microsecond counter, you might want to choose 46 baud 
instead of 45 baud when using FSK on a MicroHAM keyer.  As long as you are 
using inaccurate baud rate, you might as well be wrong on the higher speed side 
:-).  It will give pretty much the same error rate (46 baud only degrades from 
45 baud by a practically immeasurable smidgen), but it is 2% faster than if you 
let the software round 45.45 baud down to 45 baud.  

> Kok, would you also like a bowl of Fish Head Soup?

You know that the cheeks are the best part of the fish head, right? :-) :-)  At 
least for Asian fish head dishes.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>