A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why don't voice radio communications use FM?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old September 3rd 06, 04:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 91
Default Why don't voice radio communications use FM?

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 13:39:09 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Larry Dighera writes:

--- cut-----

Anything that isn't signal is noise. AM transmissions are fuzzy and
hard to hear. In fact, aviation AM radio is probably the noisiest
type of radio voice communication still in use. Most other types of
radio communication today are FM.


This thread is becoming a lot of guessing and not based on facts!
I doubt anybody has evaluated AM compared to FM in an aircraft so
won't know what the effects are when tried side by side.

There is absolutely no difference in qualilty between AM & FM if they
are designed to the same specification. If you modulate an AM or FM
transmitter with up to 3KHx of audio they will sound identical. What
you put into the transmitter comes out of the receiver assuming there
isn't a fault.

FM maintains a low background noise longer than AM and the only
difference is at low signal levels when FM very quickly becomes
totally unreadable. AM can still be heard and understood, depending on
the ability of the person listening. With all the noise in an aircraft
a little bit of low level background noise is not significant.

Digital has some merit but again when the signal reaches a threshold
it stops completely.

The whole thread is futile as the centre of the 'aviation universe'
may well be the US but you aren't going to get the rest of the world
to change. Even having regultions which are supposed to be accepted
worldwide doesn't work. Most counties have exceptions.

About the only thing which is standard is the use of the English
language. Even then the locals will use their own language! Have you
ever worked controllers with Spanish English, Finnish English,
Canadian English, New Zealand English, Cyprus English, Bahamian,
Caribbean or even Amereican English. That's where the differences can
be heard. AM radio is adequate for the job and if you don't think so
then get your installation checked out by a qualified engineer, you
may be suprised.

As for increasing the number of frequencies Europe has introduced
8.3KHz spacing. Fortunately at the lower GA flight levels it's not
required but the higher commercials now require new radios.

Most radios are dual NAV/COM so not only would you need a new COM but
a new NAV too... It isn't going to happen...!
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder John Doe Piloting 145 March 31st 06 06:58 PM
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? Rick Umali Piloting 29 February 15th 06 04:40 AM
terminology questions: turtledeck? cantilever wing? Ric Home Built 2 September 13th 05 09:39 PM
I Hate Radios Ron Wanttaja Home Built 9 June 6th 05 05:39 PM
AirCraft Radio Communications [email protected] Rotorcraft 0 November 13th 03 12:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.