[net.ham-radio] AD7I AMTOR Report to the FCC

ad7i (12/06/82)

ad7i msg 26:  A report that i submitted to the FCC on a HF RTTY
error correcting protocol follows.
-------





						  Thirty Victoria Place
						  Red Bank, N.J. 07701
						  201-949-3731 (W)
						  201-741-1151 (H)
						  November 23, 1982


Mr. Richard H. Everett
Chief, Licensing Division
Federal	Communications Commission
Gettysburg, P.A.  17325

Dear Mr. Everett:

     Enclosed is the report required by	the S.T.A. outlined in	your  letter
of  May	3, 1982.  If I can provide any additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.


						  Sincerely,





						  Paul Newland
Copy (with att.) to
Vic Clark, W4KFC
Phil Karn, KA9Q
Bill Meyn, K4PA
Dave Sumner, K1ZZ
Curtis Williams, W5DTR
netnews

































						  November 23, 1982



       REPORT TO THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ON EXPERIMENTS
	  CONDUCTED BY PAUL NEWLAND AT AMATEUR RADIO STATION AD7I
	   USING THE ERROR CORRECTING PROTOCOL DESCRIBED BY CCIR
			    RECOMMENDATION 476-2


				  ABSTRACT

     This report outlines the use of the teleprinter code described by	CCIR
Recommendation	476-2,	also  know  as AMTOR, by amateur radio station AD7I.
Use  of	 this  code  during  the  period  provided  by	 Special   Temporary
Authorization  (S.T.A.), file 7130, was	hampered by external influences.  No
"scientific" data were collected but outstanding performance provided by the
CCIR  476-2  coding was	observed by the	operator on numerous occasions.	 The
report concludes with a	recommendation that use	 of  CCIR  476-2  coding  by
U.S.A.	radio amateurs be allowed as soon as possible.


				 DISCUSSION

     This report describes use of the error correcting protocol	described by
CCIR  Recommendation  476-2  at	 my  amateur radio station, AD7I, during the
period of May 1982 to  November	 1982.	 During	 much  of  the	experimental
period,	 the  High  Frequency  (HF) station was	inoperative because of radio
problems.  Additionally, I was required	 by  business  commitments  to	make
several	 unexpected  and  lengthy trips	during the fall.  Consequently,	time
did not	permit scientific data,	per se,	to be  collected  for  presentation.
However,  I have formed	strong opinions	about the usefulness of	this mode of
communications based on	my use.


     In	May of this year I completed construction of a microprocessor system
to  convert  the CCIR 476-2 signals to international telex teleprinter code.
The firmware to	accomplish this	code conversion	was provided  by  Mr.  Peter
Martinez,  G3PLX;  I  designed the controller to be software compatible	with
Mr.  Martinez's	firmware.  An additional microprocessor	system was  designed
and  built  by	me  using  a  different	 manufacturer's	 microprocessor.   I
programmed this	second microprocessor  to  convert  CCIR  476-2	 Mode  B  to
international  telex  teleprinter code.	 I also	purchased a new	HF-SSB radio
to perform experiments with CCIR 476-2	coding.	  All  other  equipment	 was
previously on hand.


     After completing the controllers, U.S. Coast Guard	and  Canadian  Coast
Guard  weather	broadcasts  were  monitored  to	observe	the print quality of
Forward	Error Correction  (FEC)	 mode  B  communications  during  normal  HF
propagation  conditions.   In my opinion, without scientific data to back my











			   - 2 -



claim, I feel that the FEC mode	of operation for broadcast use	is  superior
to  that  of  conventional  stop-start unprotected teleprinter transmissions
(RTTY).	 A major advantage of CCIR 476-2 coding	in FEC mode is that detected
errors	are  converted	to  space  characters by the code converter.  Hence,
errors are easily and quickly spotted by the operator so fills can  be	made
from context.


     On	June 1,	1982, I	advised	the Commission's field	office	that  on  or
after  June 11,	1982, station AD7I would begin transmissions using CCIR	476-
2.  On June 13,	1982, contact was established with station TI3DJT using	 the
Automatic  ReQuest  for	 repeat	 (ARQ) mode A.	From June 13 to	29, 1982, 39
contacts were made with	radio amateurs around the  world  using	 CCIR  476-2
coding.	  Most	of  the	 contacts  were	 made  with ARQ	mode A;	only several
contacts were made using FEC mode B.  All contacts took	 place	on  or	near
14.075	MHz.   Stations	 with  which communications took place were: TI3DJT,
PA0RYS,	HB9AUK,	HB9AK, K4PA, G3PLX, A4XFW, G3RYS, KB6BT, KC7KK,	 and  TI2CC.
On  June  30, 1982, the	station's radio	was returned to	the manufacturer for
repair under warranty.	The synthesizer	provided unreliable operation  after
the radio had been on for several hours.


     On	September 28, 1982, the	radio was returned in  good  working  order.
>From  September	 28,  1982,  to	 November 14, 1982, another 31 contacts	were
made.  In my opinion, again  without  scientific  data	to  back  my  claim,
performance  using  CCIR 476-2 ARQ coding is VASTLY superior to	conventional
RTTY coding.  CCIR 476-2 displays an amazing robustness	during conditions of
propagation  that  render  SSB	and  CW	 modes	of  communications virtually
useless.  I apologize for not having scientific	data to	back my	claims;	I am
sure  that the data would substantiate my opinions.  CCIR 476-2	consistently
provided communications	during short and long duration	frequency  selective
fading,	 during	SSB and	CW co-channel and adjacent channel interference, and
during	conventional  Radio  Teleprinter  (RTTY)  interference.	  The	only
interference  to  which	 CCIR  476-2  is not immune, as	one might expect, is
another	co-channel CCIR	476-2 station.	Such stations did not  present	much
of  a problem during the test period.  However,	it is important	to note	that
there were  few	 stations  available  to  cause	 inadvertent  or  deliberate
interference.


			       IMPLEMENTATION

     CCIR 476-2	proves to be a simple addition to an amateur radio  HF	RTTY
station.   Figure  1  shows  how  the  system  components were configured at
station	AD7I.  The cost	of the CCIR 476-2 code converter  was  about  $40.00
due  to	 a well-stocked	junk box.  If all components for the controller	were
purchased new and the firmware was free,  the  cost  for  a  code  converter
should still be	well under $85.00.  This is a small amount of money compared
to other system	components.  Vast sums should not be required to implement a
CCIR 476-2 code	converter.












			   - 3 -



				 CONCLUSION

     The  performance  provided	 by  CCIR  476-2  coding  is   superior	  to
conventional  coding,  and the incremental cost	to add that capability to an
amateur	radio RTTY station is low.  I therefore	recommend that	the  Federal
Communications	Commission allow, as soon as possible, the use of CCIR 476-2
coding by radio	amateurs who now have RTTY privileges.


					Respectfully submitted,





					Paul Newland, licensee of
					Amateur	Radio Station, ad7i