2 ms·
I'd question whether anyone writing "the atmosphere is fairly transparent to microwaves" has calculated the link budget, then implemented in the real world an F
by walrus01 5y ago
I'd question whether anyone writing "the atmosphere is fairly transparent to microwaves" has calculated the link budget, then implemented in the real world an FCC part 101 licensed microwave radio system (example: 1024QAM modulation, 11 GHz standard FDD band plan, +16 Tx power, 80 MHz channels H&V dual linear, 35 km, 180 cm high performance dishes both ends) and seen the path loss in reality.
I think anyone that's done terrestrial point to point microwave telecom professionally will take a very skeptical view of things like 10 GHz band, 1 km power "beams".
the reality is that the atmosphere absolutely eats microwave, and when it's not eating it, you have temperature inversions, ducting and diffraction effects to take into account at long distances as well. this is why their demo only works at 1.0 km.
- DennisP 5y agoIndeed. Such a writer may, however, have read up on studies on expected losses for the frequencies proposed for SPS. The book I mentioned covers a lot, but a paper I just googled is available on scihub at your discretion. Here's the abstract: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00222739.1970.11688771 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00222739.1970.11... The paper is published in the Journal of Microwave Power, proposes using a wavelength around 10 cm, and with a vertical beam calculates a loss of 1% in clear skies and up to 10% loss with rain.