Topics

sticky Better RX for VHF/UHF #poll

prog
 
Edited

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU can be interfaced with a good ADC and has enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:
  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?

Results

See Who Responded

michaeld
 

 I vote number one, I think it is an excellent idea. 

Michael 

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 05:44 prog <info@...> wrote:

A new poll has been created:

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU has a good 12bit ADC and enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:

  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?

1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.

Vote Now

Iwan Davies
 

1

On 06/03/2018 13:44, prog wrote:

A new poll has been created:

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU has a good 12bit ADC and enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:

  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?

1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.

Vote Now



Virus-free. www.avg.com

Simon Brown
 

All,

 

Click on the link to add a vote!

 

https://airspy.groups.io/g/main/message/28147

 

Simon Brown, G4ELI
www.sdr-radio.com

 

 

From: main@airspy.groups.io <main@airspy.groups.io> On Behalf Of Iwan Davies via Groups.Io
Sent: 06 March 2018 14:10
To: main@airspy.groups.io
Subject: Re: [airspy] Better RX for VHF/UHF #poll

 

1

On 06/03/2018 13:44, prog wrote:

A new poll has been created:

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU has a good 12bit ADC and enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:

  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable

What do you think?

1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.

Vote Now

 

 

Virus-free. www.avg.com

Alexandru Csete
 

As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but
yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR
It's all about the knobs!

dl9rdz
 


On 2018-03-06, at 14:44, prog <info@...> wrote:

then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU has a good 12bit ADC and enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.

Sounds really great! But sure about the ADC?
0.7us A/D conversion time best case according to https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/IMXRT1050CEC.pdf
But maybe I just misunderstand the specs.

-hr

Jaap De Goede <jaap.de.goede@...>
 

Hello prog,

At the risk if being too subjective; I have enough radio's. But a "magic" radio that could assist to eliminatie the local "electro smog" would be more than welcome. Like many, I live in an "RFI contaminated" apartment. Finally it's strictly forbidden to set up a (decent) antenna on the balcony or roof. 

Imagine living in the large towers on Blvd Massena ;)

Cheers, Jaap

Ken Alexander
 

An Airspy Pro!  Sign me up!




From: prog <info@...>
To: main@airspy.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 8:44 AM
Subject: [airspy] Better RX for VHF/UHF #poll

A new poll has been created:
I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU has a good 12bit ADC and enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:
  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?
1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.


Ruben Navarro Huedo (EA5BZ)
 

Yesss !!! Option 1

Oscar EA3IBC
 

Better Airspy Prog!

;-)

Brendan Wahl
 

#1 for me.

Brendan WA7HL

Terry Gaff
 

Sounds very interesting... I'm totally ignorant on the technicalities of the devices mentioned above but I think an SDR from Airspy that covers up to several GHz would be very nice indeed. Perhaps it could favourably compete with the other offerings that cover that sorta range .. HackRF, LimeSDR etc ?
Terry

Al Scanandoah
 

I don't understand the concept presented in option #4. What is "too many"? ;)

Al



Sent via mobile

Siegfried Jackstien
 

number one and two together :-)

dg9bfc sigi


Am 06.03.2018 um 16:25 schrieb prog:

[Edited Message Follows]

A new poll has been created:

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU can be interfaced with a good ADC and has enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:

  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?

1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.

Vote Now

Nicolas Kulaga
 

For me it would be 1 and 2.

Le 6 mars 2018 17:25, "prog" <info@...> a écrit :

[Edited Message Follows]

A new poll has been created:

I was checking my notes for alternatives to the current Airspy R2/Mini design and wondered if consulting the community would give some constructive input. As the market is already crowded with low cost receivers and transceivers, but yet Icom manages to sell a 4 figures SDR, I was thinking of making something that is as open as possible for extensions and work good enough for the most demanding operators and pro's, all while being affordable.
The idea is to replace the R820T2 tuner with one of its latest high performance siblings, then replace the old LPC4370 with the brand new i.MX RT1020. This MCU can be interfaced with a good ADC and has enough processing power for oversampling and decimation through the Cortex M7 core, which will bring the final resolution higher.
The general goals:

  • Better RX performance than the general purpose low cost silicon transceivers
  • 12.5 bit RX at 10MHz bw and up to 16bit at narrow band
  • Coverage from 30 MHz to 1.8 GHz or more
  • Switched pre-selectors
  • Open source
  • Same form factor as the Airspy HF+ (same box actually)
  • Leverage the RF manufacturing and testing capability developed at Itead Studio
  • Affordable
What do you think?

1. Yeah, that's a good idea!
2. Actually, I need two.
3. I want to contribute to the design.
4. I don't need more performance. I have enough radios.

Vote Now

Leif Asbrink
 

Hello Yussef,

something that can be used for two or more channels.
The Airspy ONE can be phase-locked, but the phase and
time delay is random.

If you can include the possibillity to lock to 10 MHz
and to not start until the 10 MHz signal arrives
(or until a trigger signal is sent to the units as is
done in the SDR-IP) your new radio could be used for
interference suppression by phasing. Adaptive lobe
forming and adaptive polarisation are other options.

A good idea would be to send a block number in each
USB data block so the software can manage lost blocks.

Linrad can currently manage two phase coherent channels.

Next generation software might be able to handle many
channels and that would open fantastic possibillities
for example in this case:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
At the risk if being too subjective; I have enough radio's. But a "magic"
radio that could assist to eliminatie the local "electro smog" would be
more than welcome. Like many, I live in an "RFI contaminated" apartment.
Finally it's strictly forbidden to set up a (decent) antenna on the balcony
or roof.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Antennas (E- and H-field sensors can be made almost invisible.)
Several of them at different distances from the interference
sources would allow elimination of interference to a degree
nobody even dreams about today!!

Leif

Marcus D. Leech <mleech@...>
 

On 03/06/2018 03:48 PM, Leif Asbrink wrote:
Hello Yussef,

something that can be used for two or more channels.
The Airspy ONE can be phase-locked, but the phase and
time delay is random.

If you can include the possibillity to lock to 10 MHz
and to not start until the 10 MHz signal arrives
(or until a trigger signal is sent to the units as is
done in the SDR-IP) your new radio could be used for
interference suppression by phasing. Adaptive lobe
forming and adaptive polarisation are other options.

A good idea would be to send a block number in each
USB data block so the software can manage lost blocks.

Linrad can currently manage two phase coherent channels.

Next generation software might be able to handle many
channels and that would open fantastic possibillities
for example in this case:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
At the risk if being too subjective; I have enough radio's. But a "magic"
radio that could assist to eliminatie the local "electro smog" would be
more than welcome. Like many, I live in an "RFI contaminated" apartment.
Finally it's strictly forbidden to set up a (decent) antenna on the balcony
or roof.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Antennas (E- and H-field sensors can be made almost invisible.)
Several of them at different distances from the interference
sources would allow elimination of interference to a degree
nobody even dreams about today!!

Leif
A "coherent as fark" AirSpy would be awesome for radio astronomy applications. Phase-locking is but one part of the puzzle.

If one can arrange for data streaming to start on a common trigger signal, then you have not only phase coherence, but also
bounded phase-and-time offset in the sample stream.

Joe M.
 

A dual-RX Airspy would be sweet, but let's not forget there is a time crunch here he has to deal with, so the fewer changes the faster it will be out. I would think the priority is to leave as little time for the competition to catch up as possible.

Wish list:
MORE bandwidth (say 20 MHz)
Perhaps ethernet-based (required for higher BW)
Separate input for Spyverter
Dual RX (which can go with the SV input using one of those duals)
Higher dynamic range
Maybe even a unit that covers DC-2500 MHz or higher
Built-in Spyserver

I would rather see a quick replacement for the R2 (Minimal changes except where improvements can be quickly added and tested) and a separate Airspy Pro model with the above additions.

Maybe the PRO model could have quad receivers plus the external clock.
That should eliminate any phase/propagation delays, too, right Leif?

Joe M.

On 3/6/2018 4:40 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
On 03/06/2018 03:48 PM, Leif Asbrink wrote:
Hello Yussef,

something that can be used for two or more channels.
The Airspy ONE can be phase-locked, but the phase and
time delay is random.

If you can include the possibillity to lock to 10 MHz
and to not start until the 10 MHz signal arrives
(or until a trigger signal is sent to the units as is
done in the SDR-IP) your new radio could be used for
interference suppression by phasing. Adaptive lobe
forming and adaptive polarisation are other options.

A good idea would be to send a block number in each
USB data block so the software can manage lost blocks.

Linrad can currently manage two phase coherent channels.

Next generation software might be able to handle many
channels and that would open fantastic possibillities
for example in this case:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
At the risk if being too subjective; I have enough radio's. But a "magic"
radio that could assist to eliminatie the local "electro smog" would be
more than welcome. Like many, I live in an "RFI contaminated" apartment.
Finally it's strictly forbidden to set up a (decent) antenna on the
balcony
or roof.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Antennas (E- and H-field sensors can be made almost invisible.)
Several of them at different distances from the interference
sources would allow elimination of interference to a degree
nobody even dreams about today!!

Leif
A "coherent as fark" AirSpy would be awesome for radio astronomy
applications. Phase-locking is but one part of the puzzle.

If one can arrange for data streaming to start on a common trigger
signal, then you have not only phase coherence, but also
bounded phase-and-time offset in the sample stream.






---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Marcus D. Leech <mleech@...>
 

On 03/06/2018 05:01 PM, Joe M. wrote:
A dual-RX Airspy would be sweet, but let's not forget there is a time crunch here he has to deal with, so the fewer changes the faster it will be out. I would think the priority is to leave as little time for the competition to catch up as possible.

Wish list:
MORE bandwidth (say 20 MHz)
Perhaps ethernet-based (required for higher BW)
Separate input for Spyverter
Dual RX (which can go with the SV input using one of those duals)
Higher dynamic range
Maybe even a unit that covers DC-2500 MHz or higher
Built-in Spyserver

I would rather see a quick replacement for the R2 (Minimal changes except where improvements can be quickly added and tested) and a separate Airspy Pro model with the above additions.

Maybe the PRO model could have quad receivers plus the external clock.
That should eliminate any phase/propagation delays, too, right Leif?

Joe M.
I don't think you need, necessarily, a multi-channel AirSpy, per-se, but the ability to build up a "stack" of AirSpy receivers that can (optionally) be
phase-and-time locked together.

1GiGe is "nice to have", but tends to be expensive to implement for these embedded applications--although that may have changed. USB (even USB3),
remains "dirt cheap" to have on a product.

Joe M.
 

I was thinking not only of the phase coherence users but also those who use multiple Airspy units to cover a band. Just think if you could have a Spyserver that covers all of HF... Or all of the UHF Public Safety band. Or MilAir in 7 chunks rather than 14 (doubling the scan speed).

Joe M.

On 3/6/2018 5:11 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
On 03/06/2018 05:01 PM, Joe M. wrote:
A dual-RX Airspy would be sweet, but let's not forget there is a time
crunch here he has to deal with, so the fewer changes the faster it
will be out. I would think the priority is to leave as little time for
the competition to catch up as possible.

Wish list:
MORE bandwidth (say 20 MHz)
Perhaps ethernet-based (required for higher BW)
Separate input for Spyverter
Dual RX (which can go with the SV input using one of those duals)
Higher dynamic range
Maybe even a unit that covers DC-2500 MHz or higher
Built-in Spyserver

I would rather see a quick replacement for the R2 (Minimal changes
except where improvements can be quickly added and tested) and a
separate Airspy Pro model with the above additions.

Maybe the PRO model could have quad receivers plus the external clock.
That should eliminate any phase/propagation delays, too, right Leif?

Joe M.
I don't think you need, necessarily, a multi-channel AirSpy, per-se, but
the ability to build up a "stack" of AirSpy receivers that can
(optionally) be
phase-and-time locked together.

1GiGe is "nice to have", but tends to be expensive to implement for
these embedded applications--although that may have changed. USB (even
USB3),
remains "dirt cheap" to have on a product.





---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com