On 03/03/17 10:57, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
NY has brought this to us :
Do they use 2.4 GHz? I'd assumed/read somewhere that they didn't use a
resonant frequency of water for that very reason, and that 2.4 was
only available because no-one (eg military, broadcast) could use it
for anything else long-distance. On the other hand, with a dish aerial
to concentrate the available power into a narrower beam, maybe water
attenuation can be overcome sufficiently to transfer a usable signal
at 20 km range.

Much longer distances have been managed than that.

But probably NOT with *exactly* 2.4Ghz

When I was involved with this, the permitted power levels antenna gain
and rain issues meant a couple of klicks was pretty much the usable limit.

Long distance microwave hops are at a different frequency.


I really don't follow how a copper tank full of water, can attenuate a
signal more than the same tank, but empty.


Reflection and attenuation are different beasts


--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"