[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Re: FM vs SSB

> Many numbers and data's. The really important is how much battery power is
> needed to send information from A to B. For spoken words FM is the most
> inefficient way, because it takes full-power all the time even if there
> no words spoken. AM is some better but SSB is the best.
> When there are no words spoken there is no power taken from the battery.

The gaps between words do reduce the average power required over the long
The time constants used in the research were not quoted in the book.

> The efficiency of the needed class-a amplifiers are not that good as the
> class-c for FM, but for satellite use the HELAPS system is the solution.
> Then has SSB onother advantage that it needs abt. 4x less PEP compaired to
> FM to have an equal communication from A to B.

If you look at my original email the RF PEP requirements for FM and SSB
for processed speech are about the same. The average power output is less
for SSB.



Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org