IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Speech coding for security and defense apps, Why do we need very low bitrate?
kwwong
post Aug 14 2006, 11:55
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 28-December 05
Member No.: 26686



QUOTE (Garf @ Aug 13 2006, 04:49) *
QUOTE (kwwong @ Aug 13 2006, 09:26) *
QUOTE (maxonen @ Aug 9 2006, 08:58) *

QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Jan 18 2006, 04:13) *

If anyone can enlighten me as to why we need such low bitrates (< 800 bps) for security and defense, that would be splendid. smile.gif


When using low bitrates you can use spread-spectrum algorithms to distribute the signal power over a very wide range - even to a degree where the signal power will be lower than the background noise - and thus "hide" the signal in the background noise and make it practically impossible for any other party to even detect that you are transmitting something.


Can you enlightened me further in this area? How about some detail equations presentations? rolleyes.gif


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_Spectr...ecommunications


Opps, my data communication knowledge is ancient as the egyptian mummies... sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Aug 14 2006, 20:15
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 1402
Joined: 9-January 05
From: JJ's office.
Member No.: 18957



QUOTE (HbG @ Aug 13 2006, 03:30) *
How you can recieve something when the signal is below the noise level? Doesn't make sense to me.


Perhaps you need to consider the meaning of "below the noise level"?

With a narrowband signal, as you narrow the bandwidth, the noise level drops (we're assuming wideband gaussian, for now), does it not?

With a wideband signal, one needs to consider what happens when one compacts (demodulates) the signal, without compacting the noise (which is noise, after all, yes?).


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kwwong
post Sep 3 2006, 09:30
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 28-December 05
Member No.: 26686



QUOTE (Woodinville @ Aug 14 2006, 14:15) *
QUOTE (HbG @ Aug 13 2006, 03:30) *
How you can recieve something when the signal is below the noise level? Doesn't make sense to me.


Perhaps you need to consider the meaning of "below the noise level"?

With a narrowband signal, as you narrow the bandwidth, the noise level drops (we're assuming wideband gaussian, for now), does it not?

With a wideband signal, one needs to consider what happens when one compacts (demodulates) the signal, without compacting the noise (which is noise, after all, yes?).


Sounds like a Wiener filtering problem to me? sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cabbagerat
post Sep 3 2006, 13:09
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 1018
Joined: 27-September 03
From: Cape Town
Member No.: 9042



I think Garf's theory that it is to avoid direction finding is closest to the target. Although PN spread spectrum technologies are making this less critical than it once was, transmitting less data makes it much easier to avoid Huff-Duff type detection and tracking. Passive detection is still very useful and can detect transmitters of even very low level signals (even ones using spread spectrum like technologies).

Also, people often assume that military equipment is the best and the fastest. This isn't really true for two reasons. The first is most obvious - that equipment needs to be extremely rugged, which is hard to do with cutting edge technology. Another is that there is a lot of military equipment that is very old, stuff that was bought in the seventies (or earlier) and for a number of reasons is still in service. This isn't always a bad thing (it works, so why replace it with something possibly less reliable) but is mostly due to budgetary constraints. Militaries generally either have very nice new equipment or really old stuff.


--------------------
Simulate your radar: http://www.brooker.co.za/fers/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Nov 9 2010, 14:20
Post #30





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



Another consideration, and I really don't know the answer, is how many channels do you want to have available in a war zone if the terrain is such that it has to go through a satellite or high altitude aircraft based repeater?

On first read of the question, I was thinking about NRO sort of stuff where they may be archiving all phone calls in a region.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2014 - 19:25