It happened by chance to analyze a complete session of data exchange in MAHRS mode (ALE + traffic) while I had a STANAG-4285 decoder in active state on the desktop: to my surprise the decoder started printing out a bitstream though - as said - it was set for STANAG-4285 (Figure 1)
Fig. 1 |
The first thing that stands out is the equality of the ACF values, Figure 2: 106.6 ms, or 256 symbols. Thus - in my opinion - it seems that the decoder in question (Sorcerer and therefore also K500) tries to identify a signal by analyzing its ACF: probably those kind of decoders have an internal table that allows this association.
Fig. 2 - ACF values for STANAG-4285 and Echotel serial |
The structure of the frames is anyway very different, unless the first 80-symbol preamble which is common to both the waveforms (Figure 3): S-4285 framing consists of an initial 80 symbol preamble followed by 4x32-symbols data segments and 3x16-symbol probes; Echotel framing consists of the initial 80 symbol preamble that is followed by a data block consisting of 176 data symbols.
Fig. 3 - framing structure for STANAG-4285 and Echotel |
As third common feature, both the 80-symbol preambles are modulated using BPSK: the pronounced BPSK states in the constellation plane of the Echotel 1810 signal are quite eloquent (Figure 4)
Fig. 4 |
STANAG-4285 is not an autobaud waveform so the decoding is based on the user settings, just for fun I played with some sub-modes even if - as obvious - the decoder can't find the expected known symbols (16-symbol probes). The best results, in terms of "confidence", were obtained by setting the bit rate to 2400 bps, obviously the corrections are equal to zero in the uncoded mode:
It must be said that this Echotel 1810 waveform is not the only S4285-like waveform, another example is the 2400Bd PSK-8 serial waveform from the THALES TRC-1752 modem (Thales Système 3000 family), although the latter is more properly defined as "variant".
Fig. 5 - THALES TRC-1752 STANAG-4285 variant |
At the end, do not blindly trust decoders: they are not infallible and there is no magic wand; just open your wav files and analyze them.
No comments:
Post a Comment