|
DRM for Alaska on SW?
From Radio World:
Proposed Alaska test of Digital Radio Mondiale on three shortwave frequencies inFCC application from Digital Aurora Radio Technologies for experimental authorization. The DoD-funded test would use Continental transmitters designed for an Over-the-Horizon radar transmitting system and a digital signal generator operating from the Delta Junction area. “Compared to an ordinary analog shortwave signal, the DRM signal can operate with the same coverage reliably … in a 10 kHz channel using a transmitter power level approximately one-fifth of that needed for the analog signal,” states Digital Aurora in the application, which remains pending at the commission. The company hopes to determine the “impact of high-latitude ionospheric propagation in the shortwave bands on digital audio modulation using the DRM system,” as well as determine what transmission power levels will produce a reliable signal that can be received on DRM radios. Digital Aurora also hopes to determine an antenna specification to deliver a signal statewide. Judging from the application, the two-year test proposal appears notable because it would be the first time DRM has been tested in the U.S. at such high latitudes, and because the company is proposing to broadcast using digital shortwave technology to an entire state. Digital Aurora believes it can contain most of the signal within Alaska with little spillover into Canada. To avoid causing interference it plans to stay at least two adjacent channels away from any channels used by international broadcasters into western Canada. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: From Radio World: Proposed Alaska test of Digital Radio Mondiale on three shortwave frequencies inFCC application from Digital Aurora Radio Technologies for experimental authorization. The DoD-funded test would use Continental transmitters designed for an Over-the-Horizon radar transmitting system and a digital signal generator operating from the Delta Junction area. “Compared to an ordinary analog shortwave signal, the DRM signal can operate with the same coverage reliably … in a 10 kHz channel using a transmitter power level approximately one-fifth of that needed for the analog signal,” states Digital Aurora in the application, which remains pending at the commission. The company hopes to determine the “impact of high-latitude ionospheric propagation in the shortwave bands on digital audio modulation using the DRM system,” as well as determine what transmission power levels will produce a reliable signal that can be received on DRM radios. Digital Aurora also hopes to determine an antenna specification to deliver a signal statewide. Judging from the application, the two-year test proposal appears notable because it would be the first time DRM has been tested in the U.S. at such high latitudes, and because the company is proposing to broadcast using digital shortwave technology to an entire state. Digital Aurora believes it can contain most of the signal within Alaska with little spillover into Canada. To avoid causing interference it plans to stay at least two adjacent channels away from any channels used by international broadcasters into western Canada. More QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
dxAce wrote:
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Michael |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. .... on an otherwise empty band if trends continue as they have been. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
"dxAce" wrote in message ... msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. Ace would rather have no stations than stations using digital modulation. Pay attention, 'Eduardo' ... I'd rather not have any QRM. |
DRM for Alaska on SW?
dxAce wrote:
msg wrote: dxAce wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... More QRM. On the other hand, if this works, it could become a revitalizing force for SW to cover sparsely populated and remote areas of the world and even reverse the decline in SW station numbers. Like your stupid IBOC works? Pay attention, 'Eduardo', it will only mean more QRM. I do not have the luxury of living in a radio quiet area; I battle monumental QRN and RFI from hosts of consumer and industrial devices. I for one, would welcome a reliable modulation method that punches through that mess, and if a digital scheme on SW that respects known adjacent channels will do this, I am interested. Forget it. DRM = QRM. I know I'm going to hell for this, but..... If IBOC kept it's crap within the channel of the station's allocation, it wouldn't be near the problem it is, today. That's where it differs from DRM. DRM is contained within channel, and provides, often-but not always, better audio clarity, with surprisingly less power. Not to say I'm a big fan of DRM, because, right now, more often than not, it's a pain in the ass, but if implemented as promised, DRM offers more to the radio listening public than IBOC ever will. What DRM has to deal with is the propagation characteristics of HF. And that may be the razor by which we judge DRM. But...and I say this with caution, and knowing that I stand a great risk of agreeing with those with whom I've disagreed in the past...I'm of the opinion that if DRM can be implemented in such a manner as it respects the SW bandplan, and can keep it's splatter within it's own channel, DRM may well be the solution that IBOC was meant to be. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:13 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com