Fliptop Mobiles and 3G

A User wrote:

> Tell me your reference for it to "bend". Is there a physics
> text book you could refer to? What is the techincal term? You
> thinking tropospehric scatter may be? I don't think the
> propogation is significantly different.

"Diffraction" is the technical term for what I was refering to.
It's a basic, undisputed principle of wave mechanics. An 850
mHz signal can track the earth's curvature better than a 2100
mHz one can.

Google references include:

http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm

http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm

http://web.haystack.mit.edu/pcr/spac...csofwaves.html

John

---

› See More: Fliptop Mobiles and 3G

John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
> A User wrote
>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>>> A User wrote

>>>> That has nothing to do with propagation at that frequency,
>>>> GSM is based on a 35km cell size. I believe 3G is is
>>>> based on WCDMA? I might be wrong.

>>> Because it "bends" better around topographic features, the
>>> choice of a lower frequency for rural areas has a lot to do with
>>> propagation over longer distances. Cingular (US) and Telstra
>>> seem to be pushing for 850 mHz to become a UMTS 3G standard.

>> Tell me your reference for it to "bend". Is there a physics
>> text book you could refer to? What is the techincal term?
>> You thinking tropospehric scatter may be? I don't think
>> the propogation is significantly different.

> "Diffraction" is the technical term for what I was refering to.
> It's a basic, undisputed principle of wave mechanics. An 850
> mHz signal can track the earth's curvature better than a 2100
> mHz one can.

That aint what mobile range is about.

> Google references include:

> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm

Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.

> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm

What it does say about earth curvature aint
relevant to the two bands being discussed.

> http://web.haystack.mit.edu/pcr/spac...csofwaves.html

Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.

Rod Speed wrote:

> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote

>> Google references include:
>
>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>
> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.
>
>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>
> What it does say about earth curvature aint
> relevant to the two bands being discussed.

In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
difference.

John

John Henderson wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>> Google references include:
>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.
>>
>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.
>
> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
> difference.
>
> John
The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction

John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote

>>> Google references include:

>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm

>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.

>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm

>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.

> In most places, the curvature is lumpy.

Nothing like your original silly claim.

> Diffraction makes a difference.

In reality it doesnt with mobile phones.

atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
> John Henderson wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote

>>>> Google references include:
>>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.

>>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.

>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a difference.

> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction

Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.

Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.

Rod Speed wrote:
> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>> John Henderson wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
> >>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>>> Google references include:
>>>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>>>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.
>
>>>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.
>
>>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a difference.
>
>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction
>
> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.
>
> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.
>
>
SO prove me wrong wanker. if not knife edge refraction what is it known as ?

Rod Speed wrote:

> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote

>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction
>
> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.
>
> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.

In the poor coverage areas that matter to this discussion, it's
quite common to be serviced by a single cell.

John

atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>>> John Henderson wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote

>>>>>> Google references include:
>>>>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>>>>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.

>>>>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>>>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.

>>>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
>>>> difference.

>>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction

>> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.

>> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.

> SO prove me wrong

Just did.

> if not knife edge refraction what is it known as ?

There is no effect like that with mobile phones, like I said.

John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote

>>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction

>> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.

>> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.

> In the poor coverage areas that matter to this discussion,
> it's quite common to be serviced by a single cell.

Bloody uncommon, actually.

And in those there isnt normally any 'knife edge' involved anyway.

Rod Speed wrote:

> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote

>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy.
>
> Nothing like your original silly claim.

Well, if you say so.

>> Diffraction makes a difference.
>
> In reality it doesnt with mobile phones.

?... the theory of radio propagation informs us that free space
losses, diffraction losses and absorption losses are all
expected to increase with frequency, and hence to be more
pronounced in the PCS (1900 MHz) band than in the Cellular (850
MHz) band. These theoretical predictions have been confirmed by
empirical studies in a variety of real world environments."

http://tinyurl.com/r7tzh

John

Rod Speed wrote:
> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>>>> John Henderson wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>>>>> Google references include:
>>>>>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>>>>>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.
>
>>>>>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>>>>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>>>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.
>
>>>>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
>>>>> difference.
>
>>>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction
>
>>> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.
>
>>> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.
>
>> SO prove me wrong
>
> Just did.
>
>> if not knife edge refraction what is it known as ?
>
> There is no effect like that with mobile phones, like I said.
>
>
there is with vhf/uhf . we all now thats a fact

John Henderson wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy.
>> Nothing like your original silly claim.
>
> Well, if you say so.
>
>>> Diffraction makes a difference.
>> In reality it doesnt with mobile phones.
>
> ?... the theory of radio propagation informs us that free space
> losses, diffraction losses and absorption losses are all
> expected to increase with frequency, and hence to be more
> pronounced in the PCS (1900 MHz) band than in the Cellular (850
> MHz) band. These theoretical predictions have been confirmed by
> empirical studies in a variety of real world environments."
>
> http://tinyurl.com/r7tzh
>
> John
Freznal Zone

>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.
>>
>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
>> difference.
>>
>> John
> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction

It must be very common, wtf are you on about?

"atec77" <atec77***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Rod Speed wrote:
>> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> atec77 <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>> John Henderson wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> John Henderson <[email protected]> wrote
>>
>>>>>>>> Google references include:
>>>>>>>> http://www.elprotech.com/elpro/2_4GHz.htm
>>>>>>> Doesnt say anything about earth curvature.
>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/afwa/U2.htm
>>>>>>> What it does say about earth curvature aint
>>>>>>> relevant to the two bands being discussed.
>>
>>>>>> In most places, the curvature is lumpy. Diffraction makes a
>>>>>> difference.
>>
>>>>> The effect is commonly known as knife edge refraction
>>
>>>> Pity you get **** all of that with mobile phones.
>>
>>>> Essentially because few mobile phones can see just one base.
>>
>>> SO prove me wrong
>>
>> Just did.
>>
>>> if not knife edge refraction what is it known as ?
>>
>> There is no effect like that with mobile phones, like I said.
> there is with vhf/uhf . we all now thats a fact

Do we? Maybe you should be on the VHF/UHF newsgroup instead of this one