On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, wbr wf4r wrote:
> I totally disagree with Ev on the "ERP" issue. I think it would
> discourage the
> betterment of one's station by building a better antenna system. The
> determination
> of ERP should not be used as a power class division. Thankfully the FCC does
> not
> limit ERP.
> Dana, N1FOZ, said it best
> "I personally think that going to an ERP based class system would be
> very confusing. In order to make sure no one exploits a big loop hole
> the rules would get VERY complex."
> Let's keep it as simple as possible, please!
The more I think about it, the more complicated it gets. Has anyone
mentioned path loss yet? Path losses skyrocket as you go up the bands.
An ERP of a megawatt on 10368 MHz isn't going to do you any good if the
path loss is 160 dB. How would that be worked into the equation? You'd
have to consider each path as well as the ERP. If I'm sitting in a valley
with my 10368 gear on a dish, I'm not going to get very far. The path
loss would far exceed ERP unless I happen to get very lucky with
rainscatter or EME. (I'd be a dummy for trying to operate in the valley,
anyway.) :-)
I don't think there's a clear-cut solution to any of this. It looks like
you'd have to consider power out of transmitter, antenna gain, antenna
height, path and path loss, RX preamp gain/NF, etc.
All this had to be computed for communication with the Apollo space
missions (I've been through those calculations), but it looks like a bit
much for a contester. It would be different for every QSO.
73, Zack W9SZ
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|