S. Fla long range reception

#21
Its not about likelyhood, TVFool just tells you the easiest path. being lower on the tower in this case is making tropo WSFL's strongest path, as the more direct route in this case is more than 2 edge diffracted as it is either blocked by terrain or if the intervening area is flat, the 60ft drop means the radio horizon is closer for that station.

If tropo is the easiest path, then the direct signal is very very very weak, i doubt very much multipathing is the issue if the OP is receiving the signal via tropo.

Of course there is always the chance that TVFool is wrong, and its a 2edge signal, TVFool is not perfect by any means.
If you would just look at the terrain maps you could see the truth. Clearly the 2Edge signal reaches WSFL at all times. In fact, the NM figures for both scenarios, which you can see if you look at Nimrod's .png and No Static's TV Fool link, are both very close -- within 0.3 dB...

Nimrod -- 15 ft.
WLTV NM = -9.0 2Edge
WSFL NM = -9.1 Tropo

No Static -- 150 ft.
WLTV NM = -3.3 2Edge
WSFL NM = -3.6 2Edge

Since the tropo paths aren't traced, the terrain maps are all essentially identical. What is happening is the Tropo just barely crosses over the 2Edge signal in strength with a lower antenna. There's only room on the report for one type of signal.

R.
 

Fringe Reception

Super Moderator, Chief Content Editor
Staff member
#22
Rikideemus,

I must ask if you, are talking theory or have you actually ever received television signals via troposcopic ducting? I have.

Jim
 
#23
I must ask if you, are talking theory or have you actually ever received television signals via troposcopic ducting? I have.
Yes, I've gotten a couple stations from South Bend Indiana, 106 miles across Lake Michigan. But it's still just theory, unless you count the fact that similar 2Edge/Tropo interference has been reported on other sites -- I read a lot.

Rick
 

nbound-au

The Graveyard Shift
#24
If you would just look at the terrain maps you could see the truth. Clearly the 2Edge signal reaches WSFL at all times. In fact, the NM figures for both scenarios, which you can see if you look at Nimrod's .png and No Static's TV Fool link, are both very close -- within 0.3 dB...

Nimrod -- 15 ft.
WLTV NM = -9.0 2Edge
WSFL NM = -9.1 Tropo

No Static -- 150 ft.
WLTV NM = -3.3 2Edge
WSFL NM = -3.6 2Edge

Since the tropo paths aren't traced, the terrain maps are all essentially identical. What is happening is the Tropo just barely crosses over the 2Edge signal in strength with a lower antenna. There's only room on the report for one type of signal.

R.
So you are agreeing with me, its only tropo because WSFL is lower on the tower. Whether the receiving or transmitter antenna is too low is merely a matter of point of view.

If there was a two edge path it would be reoprted, but the lack of height means not.
 
Last edited:
#25
So you are agreeing with me, its only tropo because WSFL is lower on the tower. Whether the receiving or transmitter antenna is too low is merely a matter of point of view.
No, I'm agreeing with FR that there is a 2Edge signal coming from WSFL, even though one of the reports says Tropo.

If there was a two edge path it would be reoprted, but the lack of height means not.
No, I don't think they discriminate between types of signals. We're dealing with computers. It's just reporting whichever type of signal has a higher number, per their canned algorithm.

If you look at the maps, you can see the same 2Edge signal reaching the end point in every case. I don't know how to make it any clearer.

R.
 

nbound-au

The Graveyard Shift
#26
It is possible that it is receiving a two edge signal, TV Fool isnt perfect.


But if it is receiving tropo, its possibly because WSFL is 60ft lower on the tower, meaning there may be no 2 edge path to the location in question.


Im not arguing with you, and TBH, we will probably never know.
 

Similar threads

Top