an_old_friend wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

There are some pretty darn good reasons why high-speed digital HF won't
work well. And they aren't related to early "knowledge" that caused hams
to be relegated to those higher frequencies at the time.


agreed there are reasons of course as there were then

but it is folks like you with "it can not be Done.. therefore it should
not be disused etc. that insure it can't be done

I choose to look at a thorny problem and try to see if I can make
lemonaide, maybe brew those throns in a decent cup of Tea

Radio is a fairly mature field, and digital is getting there. Many
people have a pretty good idea what will likely work, based on education
and experience. And HF is an unruly beast, given to noisy and incredibly
variable conditions. We don't have to be rocket scientists to gain that
knowledge.

Just as an exercise, how much information can be carried by a 1.8 MHz
signal? How much error correction will be needed during the summer, and
how much during the winter? Why is there a difference? Why would a
wireless digital transmission system use UHF and above for data
transmission?


in sprict order asking I don't know, don't know, difering weather
conidctions, and becuase comercail needs relaiblity where we hams are
free to spend on trying stuff

Yep, that is what I figured.

- Mike KB3EIA - -