Difference between revisions of "Talk:CATRMT"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
On further thought, could DSC capabilities be modeled by a new attribute of enumeration type or codelist (open enumeration)type for the DSC calling channel. (Open enumerations should be in Edition 2.0.0 of S-100.) | On further thought, could DSC capabilities be modeled by a new attribute of enumeration type or codelist (open enumeration)type for the DSC calling channel. (Open enumerations should be in Edition 2.0.0 of S-100.) | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Jens|jens]] 12:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC) Amended 1. and 2. accordingly. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Why no UHF? It was discussed. The initiated investigation results that those frequencies are only being used for shore-to-ship communication with supplied devices at tanker terminals. | ||
Revision as of 12:26, 29 January 2014
raphael 04:26, 15 January 2014 (UTC): Some issues:
- "LF" in code 12 should be "MF" in both list and definition.
- The frequencies for code 14 are VHF band, but the label and definition say UHF.
- What about DSC - Digital Selective Calling? Not clear whether codes 11-14 as currently defined are intended for DSC, other digital traffic (data links?), or both.
On further thought, could DSC capabilities be modeled by a new attribute of enumeration type or codelist (open enumeration)type for the DSC calling channel. (Open enumerations should be in Edition 2.0.0 of S-100.)
jens 12:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC) Amended 1. and 2. accordingly.
Why no UHF? It was discussed. The initiated investigation results that those frequencies are only being used for shore-to-ship communication with supplied devices at tanker terminals.