[hpsdr] Sasquatch II

[Graham KE9H]

Lyle:

I am starting to understand what might go inside.

What do you envision the Human Interface to look like?
Standard desktop computer LCD screen, and a mouse?
Or something else more traditionally radio like?

--- Graham / KE9H

==

Lyle Johnson wrote:
> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>
>>>> On the other hand, I like embedded DSP, and I hate to see
>>>> the HPSDR project become PC-dependent.
>>> Why not?
>>>
>>> By going for an embedded DSP you'd just be reproducing
>> existing Japanese radios but with better hardware. Isn't
>>  it about time that we shed the past and move onto more
>> advanced user interfaces? The developments of DttSP and
>> the VR kernel promise to revolutionise amateur radio.
>
> No argument.
>
> I prefer to use an embedded DSP simply because I prefer to use an 
> embedded DSP.  This is merely my perspective.
>
> The whole premise of Sasquatch is to be PC independent.  It is not a 
> requirement.  You can hook up the various modules and use Ozy and tie 
> it to your PC already.
>
> And you can already get a really small motherboard and embed a PC into 
> a box along with HPSDR modules and have a standalone solution.
>
> I prefer to not have a PC embedded in the radio, and enjoy working 
> with embedded DSP.  I accept the limitations - and challenges - that 
> brings.
>
> Hence Sasquatch.
>
>> If they are talking about the "Beagle Board".  It is a PC.  Or at
>> least it can do all the PC things you have listed.
>>
>> If I had a say in the design, I'd press for design that integrated a
>> true DSP chip with a small general purpose processor both on the card.
>>  The general purpose processor would run Linux or Unix and do all the
>> above "PC stuff" (GUI, VR kernel,...) The chip could be an ARM, SPARC
>> or a "soft CPU" burned into an FPGA.  The DSP would have to have a
>> free toolchain.  It would be more then really cool if the tool chain
>> could run on the general purpose processor makeing a self contained
>> system.
>
> What you are describing is a TI OMAP processor.
>
> The Beagleboard is based on the OMAP3530.  The new one is the 
> OMAPL137.  There are trade offs between them, depending on what you 
> wish to accomplish.
>
> Sasquatch was originally a spin-off into HPSDR but was in reality a 
> test bed for some AMSAT work.  But various factors suggest that AMSAT 
> has no need of this, so it is now a question of whether there is 
> sufficient interest to move forward, and if so, what the best path is.
>
> The way I read things, the development path for Sasquatch may be:
>
> 1) Port dttsp to the Beagleboard.
>
> 2) Interface the Beagleboard to ATLAS via OZY (USB).
>
> 3) Create a small carrier board (Son of Sasquatch) for the Beagleboard 
> to allow its GPIO to interface to ATLAS.  This is very dependent on 
> there being sufficient bandwidth, etc., for the FPGAs downstream to be 
> loaded and interfaced (Penelope, Mercury, Phoenix/Janus).
>
> 4) Evaluate creating an OMAPL137-based board with the bus bandwidth 
> for ATLAS, etc.  If this looks like a reasonable thing to do then...
>
> 5) Port dttsp to the OMAPL137.
>
> 6) Create the hardware OMAPL137 board (Sasquatch II).
>
> ?
>
> 73,
>
> Lyle KK7P
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>



 1228952720.0