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 » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Power FLARM power



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 5th 12, 06:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,565
Default Power FLARM power

Can anyone comment of why Power FLARM transmit power appears to be
much less than the transmit power allowed by FCC for this class of
FHSS device? (ref test report on file with FCC)

Is this a limitation of the RF module that was selected? Was it to
increase battery life? Was it expected that adequate range would be
achieved with a very low power level?

Does the brick have the same transmit power as the portable?

Andy
  #2  
Old June 5th 12, 06:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Evan Ludeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 1:24*pm, Andy wrote:
Can anyone comment of why Power FLARM transmit power appears to be
much less than the transmit power allowed by FCC for this class of
FHSS device? (ref test report on file with FCC)

Is this a limitation of the RF module that was selected? *Was it to
increase battery life? *Was it expected that adequate range would be
achieved with a very low power level?

Does the brick have the same transmit power as the portable?

Andy


Link, please?
  #3  
Old June 5th 12, 09:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,565
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 10:59*am, Evan Ludeman wrote:
Link, please?


The direct link to the doc doesn't seem to work but you can find it by
going he

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repor...ericSearch.cfm

Searching for grantee code ZKU

selecting DETAIL, then Test report.

Test data are included in appendix B


Andy
  #4  
Old June 5th 12, 10:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andrzej Kobus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 585
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 4:02*pm, Andy wrote:
On Jun 5, 10:59*am, Evan Ludeman wrote:

Link, please?


The direct link to the doc doesn't seem to work but you can find it by
going he

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repor...ericSearch.cfm

Searching for grantee code ZKU

selecting DETAIL, then Test report.

Test data are included in appendix B

Andy


This would explain a lot of the issues with PowerFlarm.
  #5  
Old June 5th 12, 10:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
RAS56 RAS56 is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Dec 2010
Posts: 85
Default Power FLARM power

Did I read that correctly?

Frequency Hopping Devices with 50 or more channels are allowed a 1watt output, devices with 49 or less are allowed a .25 watt output?

And Powerflarm's output during the certification was:

At 902.2 MHz- .010 watt

At 915 MHz- .006 watt

At 927.8 MHz- .003 watt

Does seem well under the max allowed, but I guess what matters is it good enough?

Interesting, thanks for the link to the data.

  #6  
Old June 5th 12, 11:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
RAS56 RAS56 is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Dec 2010
Posts: 85
Default Power FLARM power

On Wednesday, June 6, 2012 6:56:32 AM UTC+9, RAS56 wrote:
Did I read that correctly?

Frequency Hopping Devices with 50 or more channels are allowed a 1watt output, devices with 49 or less are allowed a .25 watt output?

And Powerflarm's output during the certification was:

At 902.2 MHz- .010 watt

At 915 MHz- .006 watt

At 927.8 MHz- .003 watt

Does seem well under the max allowed, but I guess what matters is it good enough?

Interesting, thanks for the link to the data.


Forgot to add...PF has 65 channels, according to the test report.

  #7  
Old June 5th 12, 11:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Evan Ludeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 1:24*pm, Andy wrote:
Can anyone comment of why Power FLARM transmit power appears to be
much less than the transmit power allowed by FCC for this class of
FHSS device? (ref test report on file with FCC)

Is this a limitation of the RF module that was selected? *Was it to
increase battery life? *Was it expected that adequate range would be
achieved with a very low power level?

Does the brick have the same transmit power as the portable?

Andy


I see what you mean.... 10mW could not possibly have been the intended
result.

Experience at 15s showed many targets out to 6 nm in all directions
except my 6:00, where range was 1.5 - 2 nm. The range problem noted
previously appears to have been solved.

-Evan Ludeman / T8
  #8  
Old June 5th 12, 11:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave[_26_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Power FLARM power

On Tuesday, June 5, 2012 3:11:14 PM UTC-6, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Jun 5, 4:02*pm, Andy wrote:
On Jun 5, 10:59*am, Evan Ludeman wrote:

Link, please?


The direct link to the doc doesn't seem to work but you can find it by
going he

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/repor...ericSearch.cfm

Searching for grantee code ZKU

selecting DETAIL, then Test report.

Test data are included in appendix B

Andy


This would explain a lot of the issues with PowerFlarm.


Why? This is the same transmit power used by classic euro FLARMs. More than enough for advertised range.

-Dave

-Dave
  #9  
Old June 6th 12, 12:33 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,565
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 3:37*pm, Dave wrote:

This would explain a lot of the issues with PowerFlarm.


Why? This is the same transmit power used by classic euro FLARMs. More than enough for advertised range.

-Dave



Maybe you should take a look at this link to see what it was we
thought we were buying!

http://www.gliderpilot.org/FLARM-Comparisons

Note the following - "More powerful radio transmitter as needed for
USA operation"

and "Radio transmitter is not powerful enough for proper operation in
parts of the USA"

and also the comparison of "Double range dual antenna" with "Standard
range"

Also included in the text (What does it do) "The operating range is
very dependent upon the antenna installation in the aircraft. The
range of 'Classic' FLARM is about 2 km, but up to 5 km may be achieved
in individual cases. PowerFLARM will have twice the range. "



Andy


  #10  
Old June 6th 12, 12:38 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Evan Ludeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default Power FLARM power

On Jun 5, 6:11*pm, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Jun 5, 1:24*pm, Andy wrote:

Can anyone comment of why Power FLARM transmit power appears to be
much less than the transmit power allowed by FCC for this class of
FHSS device? (ref test report on file with FCC)


Is this a limitation of the RF module that was selected? *Was it to
increase battery life? *Was it expected that adequate range would be
achieved with a very low power level?


Does the brick have the same transmit power as the portable?


Andy


I see what you mean.... 10mW could not possibly have been the intended
result.

Experience at 15s showed many targets out to 6 nm in all directions
except my 6:00, where range was 1.5 - 2 nm. The range problem noted
previously appears to have been solved.

-Evan Ludeman / T8


Reading other info at that site indicates that 10mW was the design
power output. Hmmmm.

-T8
 




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
Power FLARM deliveries? Andy[_1_] Soaring 1 June 5th 12 01:33 PM
Portable Power Flarm for sale [email protected] Soaring 1 June 2nd 12 01:14 AM
Power FLARM question Kimmo Hytoenen Soaring 26 March 23rd 12 05:28 AM
Power FLARM portable reports? Andy[_1_] Soaring 2 December 9th 11 04:58 PM
Power setting table and best economy/best power... xerj Piloting 29 October 20th 05 02:44 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.