[time-nuts] Re: The Collapse of Puerto Ricoâs Iconic Telescope [April 5th, 2021 New Yorker]
Wes
wes at triconet.org
Wed Mar 31 18:33:31 UTC 2021
On 3/30/2021 4:33 PM, Lux, Jim wrote:
> On 3/30/21 2:56 PM, Wes wrote:
>> You would know better than I, but I was thinking of physical size; 100m v. 70m.
>>
>> Obviously a BIG difference in TX power.
>>
>> Wes
>
>
> It's all about EIRP, baby.
>
> I know they're talking about half a megawatt for GB, but I don't see it
> happening. They've spent so much time making it "radio quiet", putting a big
> honkin transmitter there seems odd.  Just think, a return loss from the feed
> of -30dB (which is pretty good) is good fraction of a kilowatt.
But AFAIK the system is bistatic (pseudo-monostatic) so there's no local
receiver to be subjected to transmitter leakage. We worried about leakage in
the pulse doppler radars I'm familiar with; AMRAAM and Phoenix missiles, but
even they were bistatic for most of their flights, tracking off the aircraft
fire control radar which had significantly higher ERP. Only when close to the
targets did they go active.
Wes
More information about the Time-nuts_lists.febo.com
mailing list