Re: Test version 5 of the Multipsk version 4.43.1 - Improvement of the EGC decoding


David L. Wilson
 

Yes, indeed, I think I mentioned somewhere about lookup tables being used and it is amazing how other software has errors due to being wrong information from start in theirs (not just not being up-to-date),  INMARSAT has used the term "virtual satellite" in regard to 99W and 97.5W and treats them as two different satellites in bulletin board identifications and even lists those slightly different locations.  Additionally, as you probably know (this post is really for others), INMARSAT operations (C, Aero, ISATM2M) are kept separate on them for AMER and AOR-W operations.  I suspect that is being done so a possible future move to separate satellites will be user transparent.  Additionally, what they call "harmonization" has combined some operations that were at separate LES but the same satellite in the same service into one operation from one uplink station but the old LES numbers are still used on their old frequencies--again to make things easier for the user.  For example, much is uplinked from Laurentides, Canada, but you likely never will see a LES number that identifies that.   I wish those of us  with this detailed interest could find a way to communicate outside of here as I agree it is a little off topic.  I did put my recent list up on reddit at r/signalidentification/

Join multipsk@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.