![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 09:37:53 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote: Larry Dighera writes: You haven't adequately demonstrated the need for a less noisy method of aviation communications, in my opinion. I'm not trying to demonstrate need, I'm trying to demonstrate desirability. But yours is the first complaint about white noise present in aviation radio communications impacting air safety, that I have heard in my 36 years of being an airman, and I question its validity. It's not just white noise; it's the poor quality of audio generally. You don't seem to understand there is NO quality difference in audio quality between FM & AM, unless you're equipment is faulty and introducing distortion. I've used AM & FM with amateur radio and been a professional Broadcast Engineer for 30 years so believe me you are wrong! If you compare "like for like" they are both clear and almost identical quality under normal signal levels. It's only when they become weak that AM slowly degrades, soon after that point FM will just stop working. Don't compare broadcast quality FM with AM. Broadcast FM uses about 15KHz audio bandwidth and likely to be 50KHz or 75KHz deviation, that gives a channel width of about 130KHz or 180KHz wide (if I remember correctly) that's why you get low noise in the system. Compare this to communication quality FM which is likely to have only about 3 to 5KHz deviation and you'll see a large difference. The bandwidth used is then much less, but still wider than AM. As I've previously stated an AM transmitter with 3KHz audio bandwidth has an RF bandwidth of only 6KHz. An FM transmitter using only 6KHz bandwidth will not work as well as you seem to imply and it requires a wider channel width unless you reduce the deviation even more and sacrifice the benefits of FM.. Even commercial broadcast AM only uses a narrow audio bandwidth. I'm not sure but I believe the audio bandwidth of AM broadcast is about 6KHz. On top of that many use very sophisticated audio compressors which increase the audio level drastically so everything sounds louder. It means the transmitters are almost fully modulated most of the time which gives good signal to noise ratio. That helps when listening in high noise environments like a car. You loose the dynamic range and distort the signal but it improves readability. Broadcast FM also uses compression but not as much so less distortion. Classical radio stations want to retain the dynamic range so should not use compression. - snip- It's hard to put a price on safety. Some people care a lot about it, some people care very little about it. Safety is not all about using radios. I've had a transmitter audio failure within a military controlled area. It was a non-event. Simply squawked 7600 listened on the receiver and replied with mike clicks. Got an IFR clearance (even in VFR) and landed with the green lights. Like others have said this is going nowhere and there are too many unsupported facts and misunderstandings. If you're a pilot you'll know AM works well. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |