[hpsdr] What can we do with 2 cards

[Alex]

Larry,
Gerald and Flex-Radio are welcome to do whatever they would like to do with their good product (SDR-1000).
A summary of the goals of this group are:

(a) build a minimum configuration that will augment and extend the capabilities of the SDR-1000 
    i.e. pimping out our SDR-1000s  - flame stripes, 'coon tails on the antennas, tailfins, cut down chassis and 21" wheels   : )

(b) build the best possible SDR that we can. Why? Because we are trying to push the envelope and build a development platforms that will support experimentation for the average ham. 

Like I said farther down in the post you quote, the SDR-1000 is not the penultimate SDR, it is another step in the long experimentation process (see N4HY's note on the history). We're just taking it another step. We've got some world-wide, high-power talent on this list and participating in this project, but everyone is welcome to participate to the best of their abilities! 

I'm focusing on CASMIR and HORTON, trying to make them into the best possible 0Mhz-10GHz transmitter and receiver systems possible. I'm just coordinating part of the activity, but everyone helps out even if it's something as simple as peer reviewing a design.

[I think I was just channeling Eric again..... I gotta get more sleep at night!  :  )    ]

Alex, N3NP

----- Original Message ----
From: Larry Gadallah <lgadallah at gmail.com>
To: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 3:18:46 PM
Subject: Re: [hpsdr] What can we do with 2 cards

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



 Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 08:40:30 -0400
From: "Philip Covington" < p.covington at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [hpsdr] What can we do with 2 cards
To: Alex <harvilchuck at yahoo.com>
Cc: HPSDR List < hpsdr at hpsdr.org>
Message-ID:
        <32aa05ee0605130540s3c121627wd03bd7f07c3f1229 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 

On 5/13/06, Alex <harvilchuck at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm going to bring up my question from earlier.
>
>
> Why not move the parallel port DSR-1000 control onto JANUS? 
>
>
> Then we have a 2 board solution (plus the backplane). SDR-1000 users can take advantage of other cards like:
> GIBRALTAR -  to provide the 10MHz reference signal to the SDR-1000
> SASQUATCH and the it-who-is-not-named gp I/O board  - or computerless SDR-1000 operation 
> (the gp I/O board can also replace the UCB).
>
> My vote is not to regress the OZY design, but to put the SDR-1000 interface system requirements onto JANUS.
> I know one argument put forward was: 
> Why send the SDR-1000 control commands down the ATLAS bus, deal with them at the OZY.
>
> Well, since we're going to have to handle other i/o commands coming from the host computer and sending them to the gp I/O card, why not let JANUS deal with the i/o for the SDR-1000.
>
> I am advocating to not assume SDR-1000 will always be "state of the art", but nor to ignore that installed user base.
> The current card interfacing structure of the SDR-1000 leaves lots to be desired, the HPSDR can provide a good platofrm for expansion.
>
> No, I don't own any SDR-1000s
>
> We need to keep thinking everything through so the HPSDR will meet the requirements from the two interest areas: 
>
> (a) SDR-1000 upgrading
> (b) HPSDR as a full-up SDR itself (and as a real neat and useful generic benchtop device)
>
> Those are my 2 cents
>
> Alex, N3NP

Yep, we really need to decide whether our primary goal is to support 
the SDR-1000 or whether we are buiding or own SDR.  The answer should
be obvious...

With that being said, I am trying to accomodate everyone's wishes as
best as I can in the OZY design...

73 de Phil N8VB 
 

 If I understand Phil's comment correctly, we are trying to build our own SDR. However, given the issues of minimum builds and parts orders, cost/volume curves, etc. it seems reasonable to view support for the SDR-1000 as a practical way to facilitate getting to the final goal. I suppose then that each design change requests for SDR-1000 support has to be weighed in terms of how much deviation from the final goal it causes, how much it costs, etc.
 
 FWIW - I think that a parallel port is/should be simple enough that it shouldn't disrupt the overall architecture regardless of which board it is put on. I find the requirement for a parallel control port a significant deficiency in the SDR-1000 design. The radio should be controlled using a USB port, and I have heard that a newer, more "open" USB to parallel cable will be offered by Flex-Radio soon.

 73,
-- 
Larry Gadallah, VE6VQ/W7
lgadallah AT gmail DOT com_______________________________________________
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/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openhpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org/attachments/20060517/e8f5e66f/attachment-0004.htm>