5 ms·
I wonder how modern (2022) equipment might fare? Certainly the author picked a beautiful region to do that kind of outdoor experiment in.
by jll29 5y ago
I wonder how modern (2022) equipment might fare?
Certainly the author picked a beautiful region to do that kind of outdoor experiment in.
- OJFord 5y ago> Certainly the author picked a beautiful region to do that kind of outdoor experiment in. I don't mean to be argumentative, but I wonder what the ugliest 43.33km line of sight environment one could find would be? I imagine it's quite a good proxy for beauty, the maximum distance you can see.
- bombcar 5y agoUgliest would be point-to-point in a some run-down city.
- drewzero1 5y agoThere's an old dish antenna on the roof of my office that's pointed at a building we used to have in the 90s. I've wondered if I could get it to do anything cool, since my house is near the other building, but I don't think I could get an antenna high enough to get line of sight.
- bombcar 5y agoI would not be surprised at all if half or more of the dishes you see on commercial buildings are just vestigial, waiting for a signal that will never come again.
- drewzero1 5y agoI have seen so much obsolete equipment that was left in place after replacement, some of it even still plugged in and running but not connected to anything. My favorite was an SCO box that beeped every day when it attempted to dial out to another server, long since decommissioned, over a phone line that was disconnected years ago.
- OJFord 5y ago43.33km line of sight though? How run-down is this city?
- bombcar 5y agoLos Angeles is wider than that, and I'm sure you could get a high-rise to high-rise line of sight.
- thehappypm 5y agoThat would probably be pretty though. Mountain backgrounds, full city skyline.
- bombcar 5y agoYeah even Wall-E’s trash piles get decent from far away.
- cardiffspaceman 5y agoIn Los Angeles, California, there is a street called Sepulveda Blvd[1]. With extensions outside the city proper that have the same name, it once went 68.9 km end to end. Unfortunately for my hypothetical, it is not a straight line. But to me, it increases the odds that there is a street somewhere in the world's large metropolises that extends that far, and that it goes in a straight line, and you could see one end from the other, or at least the tops of buildings at either end could see each other. And then run-down is in the eye of the beholder. [1] Part of the street was renamed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepulveda_Boulevard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepulveda_Boulevard
- genewitch 5y agoSepulveda is a good one, but i remember for a small section it's called "Imperial Highway"[1] And that is 169km, and the longest "straight" section is 50km[2]. I have driven that stretch many many times, and it takes hours, even at midnight. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Highway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Highway [2] https://i.imgur.com/c7Og4sr.png https://i.imgur.com/c7Og4sr.png
- falcolas 5y agoMy vote would be for over badlands. They're fairly flat on the median, but it looks like a pockmarked hellscape of dirt and rock with little greenery.
- titzer 5y agoI find natural vistas, even the pockmarked hellscapes, to be oddly beautiful. It's in the eye of the beholder :)
- amelius 5y agoRegions that are covered in dense fog often.
- thehappypm 5y agoAlberta tar sands, maybe. Bleak nature + industrial hellscape. Or maybe somewhere like North Korea.
- sandworm101 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan_Highway_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatchewan_Highway_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fillmore_03_Hwy_33.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fillmore_03_Hwy_33.jpg Flat. Flatter. Flattest. With virtually zero change in elevation there is very little to see but pavement and sky.
- bri3d 5y agoThe flatness makes this not a workable line of sight environment without towers due to the Fresnel zone though, the topography is the only reason this 43km link worked. Need to find an ugly hilly region, a much harder task than an ugly flat region :)
- mikepurvis 5y agoI'm interested in this too— ten years or so ago I briefly got into long range wifi and bought a bunch of Ubiquiti gear (eg https://dl.ubnt.com/sr71a_datasheet.pdf https://dl.ubnt.com/sr71a_datasheet.pdf). I was never successful in getting much more than 1km, even with their recommended antennas, but I was also working with watercraft, and I know that's hard mode for 2.4GHz, particularly when your antenna isn't able to be very far off the surface and only one end can be directional. My impression though is that recent advancements in wifi have all been focused on getting high bandwidth at very short range, like same room line-of-sight, so I wouldn't assume there'd be much to be gained over b/g/n range performance in trying an ac- or 6-based system.
- genewitch 5y agoI made a comment above about the mavic drones having 8km-15km+ "line of sight" range with their handheld WAP controllers, and my having flown 2km without any issues. I doubt i'll ever go to the max range, but the power is there to get in and around trees, towers, whatever. But with 440mhz i've transmitted data over 100 miles with full decode, from my driveway in a forest with a 6 element yagi. And a couple of years ago the first trans-atlantic 440 (UHF) transmission ever was accomplished. The main issue with consumer wifi is that it's attenuated by water, and by nature, nature is full of water. That's why UBNT switched to 12ghz or 24ghz for their long range "airfiber" stuff, and hacker hams try and find 902MHZ band capable equipment, as 900mhz can "punch through" more vegetation than 2.4 or 5.8ghz.
- mikepurvis 5y agoAre you getting video over that multi-km link? I looked into long range 700 and 900 mhz systems a little bit, but it seemed like they were much more geared for control plane and telemetry type data than being saturated by a real time video feed.
- genewitch 5y agoSorry i didn't reply sooner; yes, it's compressed video, but no frame drops on a clear path - i was able to get some i-frame weirdness a few times flying low over about 800 meters of trees, but no control issues.
- nathancahill 5y agoTruly. I biked the coastal highway around the Istria peninsula last year. Never had better views or better food. Rijeka itself is a fun city too.