Re: Some questions about DSO

In article <gvqmt4pde40l9idkedfv8tlrq1dud3ecpf@xxxxxxx>,
<nemo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:01:20 +0100, Java Jive <java@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

I don't think so, TX masts are high, so clutter normally has to be
close to the receiver to have the most damaging effect, and if it's
that close, you don't need a postcode checker or whatever I manage to
produce to see it for yourself!


Really? Consider the case of a hill halfway between the transmitter
and receiver.
What difference do you think it will make to the signal if the hilltop
is (a) a ploughed field, (b) a wood, (c) a sharp ridge?

and (d) an underground, concrete lined, reservoir?

What difference will it make if the signal path *just* clears the top
of the hill, rather than clearing it by many metres?

These factors make all the difference between a strong received signal
and none at all. Will your calculations take them (and many other
considerations) into account?

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Some questions about DSO
    ... close to the receiver to have the most damaging effect, ... you don't need a postcode checker or whatever I manage to ... Consider the case of a hill halfway between the transmitter ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)
  • Re: Some questions about DSO
    ... close to the receiver to have the most damaging effect, ... and the houses my end towards Hannington. ... Now, the postcode checker asks for the house number, so surely it ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)