![]() |
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 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"RST Engineering - JIm" wrote in message
m... "Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote in message ... "RST Engineering - JIm" wrote in message ... Given the fact that a 1 watt transmitter on one end and a 1 microvolt receiver on the other end have a maximum theoretical range of 1800 miles, how in the world can you say that a 4 watt transmitter is "limited by power output"? The limitation is always by line of sight or antenna configuration. Since all transceivers of this type are limited by the FCC in regards to how much power they can output(and most of them develop the max power allowed at about 1.5w nominal) 47CFR87.131 gives the maximum power permitted in the VHF com band as 55 watts carrier. WHere do you get your misinformation? Sure, you can transmitt 55 watts. Provided you can find a FCC approved device to do so. Good luck with that. Do you ever wonder why Vertex, Icom, Sporty's, and other handhelds all list their specs as 5w PEP, 1.5w carrier? Do you think they provide such limited power just for sh**s and giggles? and since all of them come with essentially identical omnidirectional antennas, An omnidirectional (isotropic) antenna is an impossibility, although we do some mathematical "tricks" to reference all antenna gain to isotropic. Gain (dbi - decibels above or below isotropic or dbd - decibels above or below a dipole) by definition are 2.14 dB different, the dipole having gain perpendicular to the elements of 2.14 dbi. Tell me what the form factor is for an antenna putting out a radiation pattern resembling a grapefruit? You can skip the bullcrap, Jimmy. All handheld airband transceivers on the market today have essentially identical antennas which are close enough to omnidirectional for this discussion even if it isn't for mental masturbators like yourself. So you can continue to **** on everyone's shoes and try to tell them it's raining if you like, but I've already told you your mental wanking exercise is about as useless to this discussion as man nipples. I can pretty much assume they will all have very similar ranges, since obviously the transmitter is going to be the limiting factor seeing as how the other end is putting out roughly 7db more power. Either you have no idea what you are talking about or it is well into beer-thirty for you. No, I have a very good idea what I'm talking about Jimmy, which is very unfortunate for you since you can't pull your usual trick of trying to baffle everyone with bullcrap. Vertex, Icom, Sporty's and a few other lesser known brands all put out 5w PEP/1.5w carrier according to their specs and all of them have virtually identical antenna designs. The FAA radios put out about 7-9w carrier at the antenna which is pretty close to 7db more power. The FAA receivers are undoubtedly more sensitive than the handheld receivers, but not by 7db, and their squelch is set to around 5 microvolts anyway which is probably going to be pretty close to the handheld. So obviously the most significant range limiting factor is the handheld's transmitter. So you can spew all the crap you want about how I have "no idea", but you haven't offered one iota of anything that is even remotely useful to this discussion and all you're really concerned about is trying to impress yourself with what you think you know. It's the same old grind with you, Jimmy. Nobody on RAP can offer any info on radios because they have "no idea" and you're the only one who does. Then when you're done blowing smoke up everyone's drawers you failed to provide any information that's even remotely useful to the discussion. So you can use the opportunity to mentally masturbate your "engineering" knowledge and talk about theoretical true parabolic reflectors Who said anything about parabolic reflectors? I used a plain old ground plane at both ends. 2.14 dbi gain. End one. One watt AM carrier power into a ground plane. End two receiver with one microvolt sensitivity for 10 dB S+N/N being fed by an identical ground plane. If you like, you can replace the ground plane antennas with a plain old straignt dipole with no measurable gain or loss. Actual range at 127 MHz. is 1366.7 statute miles. How the hell do you think we talk to the space shuttle with essentially the same equipment a few MHz. higher with 1 watt handhelds? I'm pretty sure it's not with a ICOM A14, a Sporty's SP-200, or anything remotely resembling one. So again this begs the question, Jimmy, what value does your mental masturbation exercise bring to the subject line of your post? and receiver sensitivities that don't even approach practical applications Every transceiver on the market today will give you at least half a microvolt for 10 dB S+N/N. I was being generous by saying a full microvolt, which will give you a much better s/n ratio. Haven't designed many VHF radios, have you sonny? , but you're not really contributing much to the OP's question. Perhaps. Perhaps not. But at least I knew what the hell I was talking about. So you managed to impress yourself. Good for you, Jimmy. That's all you're really good for, but I must give you credit. At least you're honest about it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Blue Angels back in Pensacola - practice session - Diamond heading back to the hangar | Pensacola Beachcomber | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 23rd 08 04:28 PM |
Did VHF transceiver need TSO certificate? | [email protected] | Home Built | 13 | March 31st 07 06:27 PM |
FS: Val Com 760 TSO Transceiver | aieo | Aviation Marketplace | 8 | January 25th 07 04:38 PM |
FA: 760ch transceiver | EOC | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | July 27th 05 08:23 PM |
Transceiver | BoDEAN | Products | 0 | April 7th 04 06:08 AM |