Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Path to Shetland

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Path to Shetland
From: "Alan Melia" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 17:06:58 +0100
Delivered-to: [email protected]
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btinternet.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=VBfRvvGax89ODfF4NOyIgICjxg89HNcdIJigI0B14HsFdOVT4hQ+O7rttvIWONfeL2Po0NNJsXRMKd0D+QREwUFV7+jAbusE4IFqj7aPnRs0zU9VyvNoK1wWCOlQQ+fZsnrOmNLHBl1WvMPx0P3F1kZLUuSJguvepAF2he1Qbc0= ;
Domainkey-status: bad (test mode)
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Hi Dave (and Dave !) Interesting that there seems little fading but I am not
really surprised, I guess being daylight the lower ionosphere is fairly well
ionised and doing all the reflections. What I would be very interested to
see on a path of nearly 100km is whether the night-time signals suffer
significant fading at this range. The fading is probably due to returns from
two layer, and I am guessing this is worse at short distances where more
signal probably passes through the lower layer. At shallower angles like
that for the near 1000lm path to John I am hoping that less signal will get
through the lower layer/ there may well be fading but the return from the
upper layer may be weaker at this range leading to shallower fading. I could
just be totally wrong, but the proof is in the practical results. It will
only be a guide as John still barely has any night time and I am guessing
that the upper reaches may still be illuminated quite a long way south.

 This is what its all about !!

Cheers de Alan G3NYK




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>