HR2.0 - M17 Project - New Ham Radio Digital Mode

Nope.

I had no plans to "contribute to the hobby" via M17. I want to be an end user on a so-called 'universal' digital voice mode. I, and many other end users, want to know what advantages M17 may have over extant digital voice modes. We would love to use M17 if it posed advantages to the end user. And those advantages are...?

I do believe my technical contrbutions are well-known. For example, I received the 2018 Technical Achievement Award at Dayton Hamvention for same.

 

The amateur radio community needs, yet, another digital mode of operation.

 

Why?

 

I could not care less about open source or anything else related. I want to know why when I already would need to buy 3 radios to travel anywhere and use digital voice I would be interested in buying a 4th radio

 

If the goal is to "kick proprietary protocols off the radio," then it will have to be possible to buy a transceiver. If there isn't solid hardware readily available without modification, this could only ever be a very niche endeavor.

I would love for this to succeed, but success will require a large user base; and that is the most difficult part.

 

Current radios with D-Star are the Icom ID-5100, ID-4100, IC-705, IC-7100, and forthcoming ID-52; also Flex-6700.

There is nothing stopping any manufacturer or individual from building one though.

 

This is much simpler in many aspects.

Two FDMA 6.25kHz channels are somewhat equal to one two-slot TDMA 12.5kHz channel. Please say me nothing towards complexity of two relays apart as opposed to one single two-slotted just because I already operate two relays that are simultaneously installed one next to other and share common antenna system.

 

Offtopic: we need your input here.

 

This thread has devolved into less a matter of open source to more of open sores - at least with some participants.

 

Then I don't know why you are particpating in this thread if M17 isn't of interest. I'm glad you contribute in other areas. There are plenty (too many) who come here just to bitch and bring nothing to the table other than their voice on the air.

I told you what the advantages are; being able to build transcoding bridges to the other modes, and rolling your own HT by reflashing an existing DMR HT to do this mode. Again if that isn't of interest., there are other topics here on QRZ.

 

Simpler? Not really. You need 2 repeaters for the same 12.5 kHz channel that could be otherwise covered with 1 repeater. It is not really simpler, and certainly not as cost-effective.

 

The debate here reminds me of the debate over which is a "better" manufactured language: Esperanto, Interlingua, Slovio, Klingon, Barsoomian, etc.

 

This is simply not the case.

 

It's very MUCH of interest to me--I want to be an END-USER. That's why I asked the obvious questions about what advantages M17 will bring.

Note: if it can't be implemented easily there is no advantage.

To wit: It's not at all clear that 'rolling your own' goes beyond the interest of a handful of individuals. Can you, for example--easily-- re program a common radio? How can M17 achieve any level of universality without such re-programming? Can there be a off-manu firmware upgrade for an IC-705 for example? How do we, as the end user base, see the implementation of said transcoding bridges?

Look at FT8, for example: its easy to implement in the computer-radio chain by Jane or John Q. Ham. That's what made it so easy to consider. How can M17 achieve such ease?

The main value that a new digital mode scheme presents is universality. How will M17 achieve that?

These are not 'stump' questions: they are the key ones that attract and hold the interest of the main pool of radio amateurs.

BTW, I was the one who nominated the FT8 team for the 2020 TA Award. I have some familiarity with digital mode issues. I have taught such modalities at Boston University as a professor in Telecomm courses. Not my favorite tech topic, but my interest is certainly enough to ask the key questions that can HELP a new mode take off...

Frankly, I dont care if its open source or not: why is it better and how do you deliver it universally to the end-users?

73
Chip W1YW

 

Because it would be kewl!