Hi Marc,
You're lucky. Here in the US the 5 ghz 802.11a Wi-Fi band is split in to sections, one of which runs from 5725 - 5850, right on top of most of our allocation. And, the FCC is adding more channels in the 5470 -5725 section, presumably in expectation of increased demand. That polishes off the rest of our allocation.
I don't know where the 5 ghz cordless phones go - they're the big "Clickers" on 2.4 ghz where they disturb the entire band. I think the 5 ghz phones are below our allocation, but I'm not sure.
Greg KO6TH
----Original Message Follows---- From: "Marc Vermeersch" [email protected] To: "'Luc Leblanc VE2DWE'" [email protected], [email protected] Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HEO QRP [was: A emergency use for Eagle'sdigitalside] Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:47:02 +0200
Hi Luc, All,
Interference ------------
802.11b/g (2.4 GHz, WiFi) is channelized in the 2412-2484Mc range which is a clear overlap with the HAM frequencies (2300-2450Mc in ON).
802.11a (5GHz) is channelized in the 5170-5320Mc range. This is not overlapping the 5650-5850Mc range assigned to us HAMS (again in ON). There is 330Mc separation between the highest allowed 802.11a channel and the lowest HAM frequency.
It appears to me that 5Ghz is the better option based on this separation. Has any work been done on verifying interference on 5GHz?
Emergency Use -------------
As mentioned, IP is the way to go. But I'm struggling with the concept of using an amateur satellite for emergency digital communications of anything but the smallest magnitude. What is needed is 1.) high bandwidth, 2.) all the time, 3) in several/many locations.
From experience I can tell that the commercial competition (so to speak)
is able to deploy fully equipped ground stations with Mbps capacity within hours/days depending on the location. Those include power generation too.
|-----Original Message----- |From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On |Behalf Of Luc Leblanc VE2DWE |Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 05:33 |To: [email protected] |Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: HEO QRP [was: A emergency use for Eagle's |digitalside] | |On 15 Sep 2006 at 16:18, John Mock KD6PAG wrote: | | |> |> I've worked AO-40 near apogee QRP using a phased pair of homebrew quagis. |> You just need to work out your power budget and see how much antenna you |> need to get enough ERP. |> |I'm glad to hear that but on the downlink did you ever suffer from any |interference from 2.4ghz |devices? That is the whole question at the beginning of this thread. | |It seems for some when all theses goodies are migrating up to 5.8ghz they |choose to cancelled |2.4ghz on the downlink to put it on 5.8ghz for Eagle? Put it this way it |seems oversimplistic but |under the sun of San Diego a sudden light shine coming from probably |Tijuana where Tequilla is |cheaper than a bottle of coke... | |To be on 2.4 or not to be on 2.4 that is the question! | |P.S.(I don't drink coke there is too much sugar in it and it's make me too |fat) | | | |"-" |The medium is the message...The content is the audience...;) | |Luc Leblanc VE2DWE |WAC basic,CW,Phone,Satellite |Skype VE2DWE |www.qsl.net/ve2dwe |_______________________________________________ |Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. |Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! |Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb