I believe that's an incorrect conclusion, Steve. N6BV, HFTA's author, recommends making multiple runs to rule out the granularity issue that you noted. That is, he suggests modeling not at single hei
On 01/03/2015 04:18 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On Sat,1/3/2015 12:03 PM, Steve London wrote: If you are playing with HFTA, I strongly urge you to do a sensitivity analysis by changing your datapoints, rand
HFTA is a great tool, no doubt about it. But there are certain preconditions that must be met if HFTA results are to be trusted. Attempts to use HFTA outside of its domain are a waste of time. The fo
A good source of practical information is NBS Technical Note 139 "Siting Criteria for HF Communication Centers" by William Utlat: https://archive.org/download/sitingcriteriafo139utla/sitingcriteriafo
Professional software equivalents to HFTA include consideration of buildings as well as geography, but seem to be limited to line-of-site considerations at 30 MHz and up. One example widely used is E
I cannot be sure, but judging from the 2-page SignalPro brochure, it is quite unlike HFTA. It seems to be intended for end-to-end modelling of communication links, more in the line of what Radio Mobi
Yes it's interesting how some believe their computer is a god, in some cases rightly so, in others maybe not. Doug I wasn't born in Saskatchewan, but I got here as soon as I could. In the golden days