[hpsdr] I didn't think it would happen again "PING"

[Eric Ellison]

Murray

Yep, so much potential in all the creative folks here! Work, for me has
become a necessary distraction. The future of radio, becoming the present
quickly... But hey, Ham Radio has always had that attraction for me, in all
phases. A ping is like a CQ!


Have a nice day!

Eric


-----Original Message-----
From: hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org [mailto:hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org] On Behalf Of
Murray Lang
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 12:30 AM
To: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
Subject: Re: [hpsdr] I didn't think it would happen again "PING"

***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****

What I need are the TALENT and the TIME modules. Regrettably, my abilities 
and free time are modest. It amazes me that some people can achieve so 
much, all the while making a living.

BTW, I realised that the phase shifting can't be done at I/Q level because 
that's just the modulation. Would shifting the LO arbitrarily be any easier 
than the outboard scheme that I hinted at? Anyone?

Murray

At 10:03 AM 22/08/2006, Eric Ellison wrote:
>Murry/Jeff!
>
>This is exciting.! What can we do to allow you to test your concept? I
can't
>buy you a bigger yard! Which of the proposed HPSDR modules do you need?
This
>IS exciting stuff! I'm pretty much a 'supply chain' person. I may have
>pinged the list without reason, since my Comcast.Net is being blocked!.
>
>Thanks for your comments and participation!
>
>Eric - AA4SW
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org [mailto:hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org] On Behalf Of
>Murray Lang
>Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 9:15 PM
>To: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
>Subject: Re: [hpsdr] I didn't think it would happen again "PING"
>
>***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>
>The beam forming had occurred to me as well, but I was interested in the
>gain. With lot/block sizes shrinking and everyone becoming more precious,
>towers with HF beams are now virtually impossible to get approved. However
>four verticals might be more achievable. Each could be fed with a
>controlled phase shift to give roughly 6dB gain (I would have thought).
>Each could also have its own PA, making higher power easier to achieve in
>some ways. For mobile operation the control unit could be fed with a gyro
>to correct for the vehicle/vessel orientation.
>
>I suppose this could be done with four synchronised receivers transmitters,
>with the phase adjustment performed at I/Q level. However, would it be
>feasible to have  outboard units based on the LT2208, a D/A of some sort,
>an FPGA and a big memory stick? I imagine the memory speed would limit such
>a device to HF operation.
>
>Just a (apparently unoriginal) thought.
>
>Murray VK6HL
>
>
>At 10:16 AM 19/08/2006, jeff millar wrote:
> >***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
> >
> >Eric Ellison wrote:
> > > How are our lurkers doing? Anyone have any ideas for me to synergize
us
> > > again?
> > >
> >Here's some ideas:  Extend the SDR concept to multiple antennas with
> >digital beamforming.  Some snippets of ideas...
> >
> >     * Four channel receiver with each channel connected to a vertical in
> >       a four square.
> >     * Remote receivers that use 802.11 to link sections of the band back
> >       to the DSP, such at 3780-3800 KHz
> >     * Rx with 802.11 has whip, preselector, preamp, A/D, DSP, uproc, USB
> >       802.11 dongle, battery powered, clocks synchronized by 802.11
> >       messages.
> >     * Networked receivers, like IRLP/Echolink on steroids, link 10-20
> >       kHz of passband in I/Q and let DSP tune with the band, DSP can
> >       also combine signals from distributed receivers
> >     * Lay out an array of remote receivers with small whips and beamform
> >       using all the elements of the random array.
> >     * Combine beam forming and interference nulling to maximize SNR
> >     * With an array of whips, null interference in both azimuth and
> >       elevation
> >     * For all the signals in the passband, separate them by direction of
> >       arrival and simultaneously beamform and interference null on _all_
> >       signals.  Then demodulate all signals.  The output of the receiver
> >       becomes separate, selectable, audio channels for each signal.
> >
> >For the mathematically inclined, the paper below suggests some DSP
> >approaches to beamforming on all signals simultaneously.
> >
> >     www.nps.navy.mil/asilomar/asil03/prog03/Asilomar-Keynote.pdf
> >
> >Look at the slides on "blind signal separation" and "principle component
> >analysis".
> >
> >jeff, wa1hco
> >_______________________________________________
> >HPSDR Discussion List
> >To post msg: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
> >Subscription help: http://lists.hpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-hpsdr.org
> >HPSDR web page: http://hpsdr.org
> >Archives: http://lists.hpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-hpsdr.org/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>HPSDR Discussion List
>To post msg: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
>Subscription help: http://lists.hpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-hpsdr.org
>HPSDR web page: http://hpsdr.org
>Archives: http://lists.hpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-hpsdr.org/


_______________________________________________
HPSDR Discussion List
To post msg: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
Subscription help: http://lists.hpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-hpsdr.org
HPSDR web page: http://hpsdr.org
Archives: http://lists.hpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-hpsdr.org/


 1156241189.0