Why does NASA use higher frequencies even though they have worse Free Space Path Loss (FSPL)?How to calculate data rate of Voyager 1?Quantitatively, why will optical communication be better than X-band for deep-space communications?Did New Horizons use its smaller medium-gain antenna for most/all downlinking of Pluto and Ultima Thule flyby data?Can I transmit signals from a wristwatch to geostationary orbit?Deep Space Network's transmitter power versus frequency?Will there be “Near Space” Ka-band allocations for TESS?
How to publish items after pipeline is finished?
Can all groups be thought of as the symmetries of a geometrical object?
Why was this person allowed to become Grand Maester?
Why did Intel abandon unified CPU cache?
Non-aqueous eyes?
I've been given a project I can't complete, what should I do?
Why Does Mama Coco Look Old After Going to the Other World?
Teaching a class likely meant to inflate the GPA of student athletes
Is using 'echo' to display attacker-controlled data on the terminal dangerous?
How can I end combat quickly when the outcome is inevitable?
Who won a Game of Bar Dice?
Live action TV show where High school Kids go into the virtual world and have to clear levels
Can a human be transformed into a Mind Flayer?
What is the meaning of the Russian idiom "to taste tuna" ("отведать тунца")?
Longest bridge/tunnel that can be cycled over/through?
How do free-speech protections in the United States apply in public to corporate misrepresentations?
With Ubuntu 18.04, how can I have a hot corner that locks the computer?
USGS Relief map (GeoTIFF raster) misaligns with vector layers (QGIS)
What is the logic behind taxing money for property?
Electricity free spaceship
60s or 70s novel about Empire of Man making 1st contact with 1st discovered alien race
If there's something that implicates the president why is there then a national security issue? (John Dowd)
Does putting salt first make it easier for attacker to bruteforce the hash?
Why is long-term living in Almost-Earth causing severe health problems?
Why does NASA use higher frequencies even though they have worse Free Space Path Loss (FSPL)?
How to calculate data rate of Voyager 1?Quantitatively, why will optical communication be better than X-band for deep-space communications?Did New Horizons use its smaller medium-gain antenna for most/all downlinking of Pluto and Ultima Thule flyby data?Can I transmit signals from a wristwatch to geostationary orbit?Deep Space Network's transmitter power versus frequency?Will there be “Near Space” Ka-band allocations for TESS?
$begingroup$
Looking at the Formula for FSPL we see that it increases with Frequency.
Why is X-Band used for Deep Space Communications instead of lower bands like S-Band? Is it a question of data-rates? Is the noise floor lower in this band? Is it just a question of infrastructure, as the DSN uses X-Band?
Lower bands would lower the FSPL quite a bit, so I want to know the reason for this decision.
radio-communication deep-space-network link-budget
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Looking at the Formula for FSPL we see that it increases with Frequency.
Why is X-Band used for Deep Space Communications instead of lower bands like S-Band? Is it a question of data-rates? Is the noise floor lower in this band? Is it just a question of infrastructure, as the DSN uses X-Band?
Lower bands would lower the FSPL quite a bit, so I want to know the reason for this decision.
radio-communication deep-space-network link-budget
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Looking at the Formula for FSPL we see that it increases with Frequency.
Why is X-Band used for Deep Space Communications instead of lower bands like S-Band? Is it a question of data-rates? Is the noise floor lower in this band? Is it just a question of infrastructure, as the DSN uses X-Band?
Lower bands would lower the FSPL quite a bit, so I want to know the reason for this decision.
radio-communication deep-space-network link-budget
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Looking at the Formula for FSPL we see that it increases with Frequency.
Why is X-Band used for Deep Space Communications instead of lower bands like S-Band? Is it a question of data-rates? Is the noise floor lower in this band? Is it just a question of infrastructure, as the DSN uses X-Band?
Lower bands would lower the FSPL quite a bit, so I want to know the reason for this decision.
radio-communication deep-space-network link-budget
radio-communication deep-space-network link-budget
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
edited Jun 3 at 6:25
RonJohn
248111
248111
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
asked Jun 2 at 8:11
ClexClex
383
383
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Clex is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38
2
2
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FSPL) is an artifact of the way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins because the gain of the transmit antenna go up, and the combination of the FSPL and the receive antenna together remain the same.
So the reason higher frequencies are used is because the total link budget is better.
You can't just take the FSPL and ignore the other terms in the budget, it won't make sense because of the way things are defined.
You can see real-world examples of link budgets in this answer (short one) and in this answer (longer one) and in this question. You may find this one interesting as well.
From here"
Link Budget
From this answer which is from this answer:
$$ P_RX = P_TX + G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
$P_RX$: received power by spacecraft
$P_TX$: transmitted power by wristwatch
$G_TX$: Gain of wristwatch's transmitting antenna (compared to isotropic)
$L_FS$: Free space Loss, what we usually call $1/r^2$
$G_RX$: Gain of spacecraft's receiving antenna (compared to isotropic)
$$G sim 20 times log_10left( fracpi dlambda right)$$
$$L_FS = 20 times log_10left( 4 pi fracRlambda right).$$
$$ P_RX - P_TX = G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
Change from dB to linear scale:
$$ fracP_RXP_TX = fracG_TXG_RXL_FS = fracpi^4 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^4fraclambda^216 pi^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^2frac14^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^24 lambda^2 R^2$$
So the fraction of the transmitted power that is received depends on $lambda^-2$ ; it improves as the frequency goes up and the wavelength goes down.
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Clex is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36521%2fwhy-does-nasa-use-higher-frequencies-even-though-they-have-worse-free-space-path%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FSPL) is an artifact of the way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins because the gain of the transmit antenna go up, and the combination of the FSPL and the receive antenna together remain the same.
So the reason higher frequencies are used is because the total link budget is better.
You can't just take the FSPL and ignore the other terms in the budget, it won't make sense because of the way things are defined.
You can see real-world examples of link budgets in this answer (short one) and in this answer (longer one) and in this question. You may find this one interesting as well.
From here"
Link Budget
From this answer which is from this answer:
$$ P_RX = P_TX + G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
$P_RX$: received power by spacecraft
$P_TX$: transmitted power by wristwatch
$G_TX$: Gain of wristwatch's transmitting antenna (compared to isotropic)
$L_FS$: Free space Loss, what we usually call $1/r^2$
$G_RX$: Gain of spacecraft's receiving antenna (compared to isotropic)
$$G sim 20 times log_10left( fracpi dlambda right)$$
$$L_FS = 20 times log_10left( 4 pi fracRlambda right).$$
$$ P_RX - P_TX = G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
Change from dB to linear scale:
$$ fracP_RXP_TX = fracG_TXG_RXL_FS = fracpi^4 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^4fraclambda^216 pi^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^2frac14^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^24 lambda^2 R^2$$
So the fraction of the transmitted power that is received depends on $lambda^-2$ ; it improves as the frequency goes up and the wavelength goes down.
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FSPL) is an artifact of the way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins because the gain of the transmit antenna go up, and the combination of the FSPL and the receive antenna together remain the same.
So the reason higher frequencies are used is because the total link budget is better.
You can't just take the FSPL and ignore the other terms in the budget, it won't make sense because of the way things are defined.
You can see real-world examples of link budgets in this answer (short one) and in this answer (longer one) and in this question. You may find this one interesting as well.
From here"
Link Budget
From this answer which is from this answer:
$$ P_RX = P_TX + G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
$P_RX$: received power by spacecraft
$P_TX$: transmitted power by wristwatch
$G_TX$: Gain of wristwatch's transmitting antenna (compared to isotropic)
$L_FS$: Free space Loss, what we usually call $1/r^2$
$G_RX$: Gain of spacecraft's receiving antenna (compared to isotropic)
$$G sim 20 times log_10left( fracpi dlambda right)$$
$$L_FS = 20 times log_10left( 4 pi fracRlambda right).$$
$$ P_RX - P_TX = G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
Change from dB to linear scale:
$$ fracP_RXP_TX = fracG_TXG_RXL_FS = fracpi^4 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^4fraclambda^216 pi^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^2frac14^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^24 lambda^2 R^2$$
So the fraction of the transmitted power that is received depends on $lambda^-2$ ; it improves as the frequency goes up and the wavelength goes down.
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FSPL) is an artifact of the way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins because the gain of the transmit antenna go up, and the combination of the FSPL and the receive antenna together remain the same.
So the reason higher frequencies are used is because the total link budget is better.
You can't just take the FSPL and ignore the other terms in the budget, it won't make sense because of the way things are defined.
You can see real-world examples of link budgets in this answer (short one) and in this answer (longer one) and in this question. You may find this one interesting as well.
From here"
Link Budget
From this answer which is from this answer:
$$ P_RX = P_TX + G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
$P_RX$: received power by spacecraft
$P_TX$: transmitted power by wristwatch
$G_TX$: Gain of wristwatch's transmitting antenna (compared to isotropic)
$L_FS$: Free space Loss, what we usually call $1/r^2$
$G_RX$: Gain of spacecraft's receiving antenna (compared to isotropic)
$$G sim 20 times log_10left( fracpi dlambda right)$$
$$L_FS = 20 times log_10left( 4 pi fracRlambda right).$$
$$ P_RX - P_TX = G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
Change from dB to linear scale:
$$ fracP_RXP_TX = fracG_TXG_RXL_FS = fracpi^4 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^4fraclambda^216 pi^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^2frac14^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^24 lambda^2 R^2$$
So the fraction of the transmitted power that is received depends on $lambda^-2$ ; it improves as the frequency goes up and the wavelength goes down.
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
$endgroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FSPL) is an artifact of the way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins because the gain of the transmit antenna go up, and the combination of the FSPL and the receive antenna together remain the same.
So the reason higher frequencies are used is because the total link budget is better.
You can't just take the FSPL and ignore the other terms in the budget, it won't make sense because of the way things are defined.
You can see real-world examples of link budgets in this answer (short one) and in this answer (longer one) and in this question. You may find this one interesting as well.
From here"
Link Budget
From this answer which is from this answer:
$$ P_RX = P_TX + G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
$P_RX$: received power by spacecraft
$P_TX$: transmitted power by wristwatch
$G_TX$: Gain of wristwatch's transmitting antenna (compared to isotropic)
$L_FS$: Free space Loss, what we usually call $1/r^2$
$G_RX$: Gain of spacecraft's receiving antenna (compared to isotropic)
$$G sim 20 times log_10left( fracpi dlambda right)$$
$$L_FS = 20 times log_10left( 4 pi fracRlambda right).$$
$$ P_RX - P_TX = G_TX - L_FS + G_RX $$
Change from dB to linear scale:
$$ fracP_RXP_TX = fracG_TXG_RXL_FS = fracpi^4 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^4fraclambda^216 pi^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^2lambda^2frac14^2 R^2 = fracpi^2 d_RX^2 d_TX^24 lambda^2 R^2$$
So the fraction of the transmitted power that is received depends on $lambda^-2$ ; it improves as the frequency goes up and the wavelength goes down.
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
edited Jun 3 at 21:48
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
answered Jun 2 at 10:33
uhohuhoh
44k21172569
44k21172569
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
1
1
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
$begingroup$
thank you so much! I see that now, did not consider the gain formula, but you are right it is the key to the problem!
$endgroup$
– Clex
Jun 2 at 15:43
1
1
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
$begingroup$
@Clex ya it was confusing for me at first too. Running through a whole example ike I did here takes some time the first time (it took me hours!), but it helps a lot in the long run.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:48
2
2
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
Yeah, I've always thought that the definition of FSPL (@uhoh, note the acronym isn't FPSL) was kludgy. But once a peer-reviewed paper using it was accepted, saying it should be redefined to be more physically intuitive has the telecom specialists tilting their heads back some while still looking at me, pointing, and uttering, "BLASPHEMY!!".
$endgroup$
– Tom Spilker
Jun 3 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
$begingroup$
@TomSpilker ha! I can picture it. Thanks for catching my misacronymization also.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 3 at 21:52
add a comment |
Clex is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Clex is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Clex is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Clex is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36521%2fwhy-does-nasa-use-higher-frequencies-even-though-they-have-worse-free-space-path%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
You should rephrase the title of your question (maybe "why using low frequencies for deep space communication?") so that it is easier to browse the website without opening each question about deep space communication
$endgroup$
– Manu H
Jun 2 at 8:28
$begingroup$
The wavelength dependence of the definition of free space path loss (FPSL) is an artifact of he way the receiver's antenna gain is defined in the same link budget calculation. It's referenced to an ideal isotropic antenna with a receive area of roughly 1 square wavelength, which for high frequency gets very small. If you do them together (transmit gain, path loss, receive gain) you'll see that the higher frequency wins.
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 10:28
$begingroup$
@ManuH how does that look?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Jun 2 at 15:38