[TowerTalk] Site Elevation and TOA
Grant Saviers
grants2 at pacbell.net
Wed Jun 18 02:29:00 EDT 2014
Dean gave an HFTA talk at Seaside last week and I asked this question.
"How far away do I not need to worry about a mountain?" His answer:
"over the horizon". He showed some patterns much further out than 14000
feet. To get those he changed the DEM baseline steps to 100m from the
default 30m. The ray tracing matrix is of fixed size, 150x150 as I
recall, so a coarser horizontal step is needed to calculate to further
distances. A limitation of a program written in Fortran for a mainframe
with less memory than your watch.
OTOH, my 15 mile away mountain range is about 3 deg above horizon, so
while a purist might calculate the pattern, I think it is not
consequential (hopefully).
One of the antenna books, I don't recall which, shows an example of a DX
station with a far mountain that significantly affects the pattern.
Grant KZ1W
On 6/17/2014 3:29 PM, Bill via TowerTalk wrote:
>
> According to N6BV, who knows his stuff...
>
> Beyond approximately14000 feet has very little effect on the TOA for HF.
> Close in is far more important. You can test this by making up a file with
> hypothetical elevations and putting it into N6BV's program
>
> Bill K4XS
>
>
>
> In a message dated 6/17/2014 9:47:04 P.M. Coordinated Universal Time,
> w9ac at arrl.net writes:
>
> I'm trying to locate land in south GA for a remote Internet station. Two
> self-supporting towers are ready for installation. Tower #1 is 140 ft and
> Tower #2 is 100 ft. A full-size, 4L 40m monoband Yagi goes on the top of
> tower #1. A 30m-10m LPDA goes on tower #2. Siting has become a lot harder
> than I imagined. Here are my siting constraints:
>
> 1) Low noise in the immediate area;
> 2) Easy utility power access;
> 3) High speed data access over FTTH or CATV. No DSL unless I really get
> desperate. Too many future applications will need the extra throughput;
> 4) High land that either remains flat for the TOA distance or slopes
> downward.
> 5) Land that fits within the project budget.
>
> Sounds easy. Way harder than you think -- unless a home goes up on the
> property and I move there where I have more options due to the higher price of
> properties. Moreover, many counties won't allow a telecom shelter or
> other structure as a primary use without first establishing a residence through
> placement a house or manufactured home. I don't want that. I want a
> remote site only. My main focus is Brantley County, GA. There's no zoning in
> the county. There's also super-high-speed fiber supplied to the entire
> rural county by the local telco. The telco bet big and lost when they assumed
> a housing market explosion in 2005 that turned into an implosion. Along
> the county highways are dozens of started subdivisions that are now ghost
> towns. Cheap land, but the developers recorded much of it early on with deed
> restrictions. Once just a few owners take possession, changing the
> covenants is a nightmare. It's one thing to take up the cause when you already
> own the land. It
> 's insane to consider restricted land when you're looking to buy from the
> start.
>
> After looking at dozens of parcels, I've found a few that might work.
> Here's my question: In terms of wavelength, at what distance is the TOA set
> for elevated, horizontal antennas? I realize that the TOA is composed of
> near, intermediate and far fields above elevation, but there must be a
> distance where say...90% of the predicted TOA occurs. What is that distance in
> wavelengths from the antenna?
>
> Paul, W9AC
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
More information about the TowerTalk
mailing list