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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
This question relates to VOR.
I read that when VORs where increasing continuously in number in the beginning of their "career" there was a lack of available frequencies. So they increased the frequencies by increasing the number of chanels and they did that by decreasing the chanel width e.x from 100kH width to 50kH width. Can you explain me please how this(meaning increase of channels by reducing their width) will increase the number of available frequencies for the increasing number of VOR stations. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
Can you explain me please how this(meaning increase of channels by
reducing their width) will increase the number of available frequencies for the increasing number of VOR stations. It means you can put channels in between existing channels. If done right, there is no interference. It requires that existing transmitters be modified (if they are not already "narrow" enough) so that there in fact is no interference. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
VOR is line of sight so the same frequency can be used over
and over as long as there stations are located far enough apart and the "service volume" is protected. If you look at the useable distance for a VOR signal, you will see that very high altitudes are shorter range than lower and middle altitudes because the interference is greater at high altitudes. Better quality radio receivers can reject interference, radio band width can't be increased because all the available frequencies have been assigned. But by making a channel narrower, you can double the number of possible channels each time you narrow the channel. Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. channels are in the thousands. VOR is less suited to adding more and more channels because of the location issues. If you have 108 to 117 for channels and you can only tune whole numbers, you get ten channels. If you can tune 108.5, you get 20 channels. If you tune 108.1 you get 100 channels and 108.010 gets a 1,000. But if the power is high, it is harder to reject the nearby station. The FAA flight tests naviads and one of the issues is clear radio reception. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P "thejim" wrote in message ups.com... | This question relates to VOR. | I read that when VORs where increasing continuously in number in the | beginning of their "career" there was a lack of available frequencies. | | So they increased the frequencies by increasing the number of chanels | and they did that by decreasing the chanel width e.x from 100kH width | to 50kH width. | | Can you explain me please how this(meaning increase of channels by | reducing their width) will increase the number of available frequencies | for the increasing number of VOR stations. | |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
"Jose" wrote in message
. net... Can you explain me please how this(meaning increase of channels by reducing their width) will increase the number of available frequencies for the increasing number of VOR stations. It means you can put channels in between existing channels. If done right, there is no interference. It requires that existing transmitters be modified (if they are not already "narrow" enough) so that there in fact is no interference. And that the receivers also be updated to ensure that they can select within the narrow enough frequency range (and of course, be tuned to the intermediate frequencies as well). Pete |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
thejim wrote:
This question relates to VOR. I read that when VORs where increasing continuously in number in the beginning of their "career" there was a lack of available frequencies. So they increased the frequencies by increasing the number of chanels and they did that by decreasing the chanel width e.x from 100kH width to 50kH width. Can you explain me please how this(meaning increase of channels by reducing their width) will increase the number of available frequencies for the increasing number of VOR stations. Older radios, with older technology, were capable of transmitting on their tuned frequency, but the signal spilled over onto neighboring frequencies.. this dictated fairly wide channel spacing... to prevent interference... Newer radios with newer innards are capable of much more precise transmission, with much less "width" to the spillover. By mandating everyone use the newer radios to transmit, you in effect open up more "channels" in between the existing ones that you can use. Right now we have (on com frequencies) 25 khz spacing between designated frequencies.. Many of the new radios being sold are already capable of operating at the NEXT spacing designation, somewhere on the order of 8.3 khz, which will triple the existing amount of aviation band com freqs (from 760 to over 2000). By simply halving the nav frequency spacing, you can double the number of nav frequencies available. Navs are currently at 50 khz spacing, if I remember correctly. Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
"Jim Macklin" wrote:
Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. channels are in the thousands. So why are we still stuck with almost every uncontrolled field in existence having their CTAFs crammed into just 2 or 3 freqs? How many years is it since you could even buy a radio that didn't have 25 khz spacing? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
In article ,
Roy Smith wrote: Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. channels are in the thousands. So why are we still stuck with almost every uncontrolled field in existence having their CTAFs crammed into just 2 or 3 freqs? How many years is it since you could even buy a radio that didn't have 25 khz spacing? Isn't it "interesting" that nearly all the new AWOS frequencies require 25 kHz spacing? Yet they can't change any CTAF frequencies. -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
government assigns the channels, we are stuck with it.
"Roy Smith" wrote in message ... | "Jim Macklin" wrote: | Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty | years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. | channels are in the thousands. | | So why are we still stuck with almost every uncontrolled field in existence | having their CTAFs crammed into just 2 or 3 freqs? How many years is it | since you could even buy a radio that didn't have 25 khz spacing? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
You can buy legal 1, 6, 90, and 360 channel radios.
Jim "Roy Smith" wrote in message ... "Jim Macklin" wrote: Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. channels are in the thousands. So why are we still stuck with almost every uncontrolled field in existence having their CTAFs crammed into just 2 or 3 freqs? How many years is it since you could even buy a radio that didn't have 25 khz spacing? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Channel Width
But they now must meet the latest standards for bandwidth,
etc. Many of the old Narco, ARC and other radios cannot be used. "RST Engineering" wrote in message ... | You can buy legal 1, 6, 90, and 360 channel radios. | | Jim | | | "Roy Smith" wrote in message | ... | "Jim Macklin" wrote: | Going from 100 KHz to 25 KHz quadrupled the number of channels. Forty | years ago, 90 comm. channels and 50 VOR was common and now, Comm. | channels are in the thousands. | | So why are we still stuck with almost every uncontrolled field in | existence | having their CTAFs crammed into just 2 or 3 freqs? How many years is it | since you could even buy a radio that didn't have 25 khz spacing? | | |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pair of new in box, unused, EAC-1 Single Channel EGT/CHT/OAT | Acroav8r | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | May 18th 06 11:26 AM |
Pair of new in box, unused, EAC-1 Single Channel | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | May 10th 06 07:17 AM |
Discovery Wings Channel ??? | Bush | Piloting | 7 | November 15th 04 04:07 PM |
Discovery Wings Channel ??? | Andy Asberry | Home Built | 0 | November 13th 04 05:11 AM |
History Channel show update | Roger Long | Piloting | 0 | October 11th 04 05:06 PM |