My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1997
>
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2023 8:47:18 AM
Creation date
9/6/2023 8:40:23 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
361
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
■'1 b <br />« * *EXECUTIVE SUMMARY*** <br />Amateur Radio communications between two <br />distant points on the earth rely on signals propagating <br />through the ionosphere. Acting as somewhat of a mirror <br />at heights in the order of 150 miles, the ionosphere <br />returns signals to the earth a thousand or more miles <br />away <br />The vertical angle of radiation is the key factor in <br />determining effective communications distances beyond <br />line of sight. For the greatest possible communications <br />distance, the energy from the transmitter must be <br />•ddiated at angles close to the horizon. For this to take <br />place, a horizontal antenna must be placed high above <br />th.'> ground in terms of wavelengths. The length of a radio <br />‘'3ve is inversely related to its frequency. <br />A beam type of antenna at a height of 70 feet or <br />more will provide greatly superior performance over the <br />tssmo antenna at 35 feet, all other factors being equal <br />‘I ''.«<^cJant receiving station, a transmitting antenna at <br />7: '-^t wilt provide the effect of approximately 3 to 4 <br />more transmitter power than the same antenna at <br />35 feet. Depending on the level of noise and interference, <br />this performance disparity is often enough to mean the <br />difference between making distant radio contact with <br />fairly reliable signals, and being unable to make distant <br />contact at ail. Thus, the antenna at 35 feet is un <br />satisfactory. while the same antenna at 70 feet is quite <br />satisfactory. The 70-foot height is used only for the <br />purpose of Illustration, however, and should not be <br />construed as the optimum height for antennas. Heights <br />above 100 feet will give significantly better performance <br />than at 70 feet. <br />If an amateur operator is restricted to the use of low <br />antennas, it is reasonable to assume he will obtain more <br />powerful transmitting equipment to compensate for the <br />loss of antenna effectiveness. For example, he might <br />increase his transmitter power from 500 watts to <br />1.5 kilowatts, to compensate for a three-fold loss in <br />antenna effectiveness because of height limitations. This <br />iricrease in power, in turn, increases the possibilities for <br />his signal to overload nearby television and radio <br />receivers, creating interference for viewers and listeners. <br />A high amateur antenna provides p greater degree <br />of immunity from television ii-«- -ference than does a low <br />antenna. The sole sourc? eot^x d RF energy from <br />the Amateur Radio station is its antenna. Raising that <br />antenna to an increased height, well above the level of . <br />existing antennas for television reception, will reduce the <br />possibility of interference to television reception from <br />fundamental overload. <br />• I- <br />^iS^m
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.