On 11 Oct, 12:15, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
This is a curious question, which I don't believe has been asked before,
and to which I couldn't actually find and answer. And only being half
asleep and thinking about one thing whilst reading the paper idly,
caused three things to slip into my mind together.

Namely 'rural broadband' the influence of the environment on
transmission speed and quality, and the fact that here, high up in west
suffolk, and hence potentially *a target for windmills, we already have
half a dozen radio towers dotted with aerials and dishes.

So, how do presumably metal or carbon fibre blades thwacking past or
around a microwave tower affect its transmission and reception?

Nearly all mobile phone masts are fed via microwave. A HUGE amount of
data backbones are built out of them - a lot cheaper than fibre. And
although the towers occupy in general the highest ground around,
windmills reach even higher. They would inevitably be in many line of
sight beams' paths..

It seems to me as well as being ugly, noisy, and dangerous to low flying
aircraft, as well as effectively screening low flying aircraft from
radar, these things are likely to also totally disrupt any RF
frequencies in the VHF bands and up, that rely on line of sight
transmission to teh horizon.

Already the inlaws digital TV is totally disrupted by wet leaves on
trees blowing in the wind..the DSP algorithms can cope if the things are
static, but not if the multipath is constantly changing.

I know there are RF experts here. The question is, would a landscape
with a windmill every kilometre, actually be one in which any frequency
beyond short wave was usable?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8320622.stm

special paint stops some interference
lyn