Range
The useful direct range of a two-way radio system depends on radio propagation conditions, which are a function of frequency, antenna height and characteristics, atmospheric noise, reflection and refraction within the atmosphere, transmitter power and receiver sensitivity, and required signal-to-noise ratio for the chosen modulation method. An engineered two-way radio system will calculate the coverage of any given base station with an estimate of the reliability of the communication at that range. Two-way systems operating in the VHF and UHF bands, where many land mobile systems operate, rely on line-of-sight propagation for the reliable coverage area. The "shadowing" effect of tall buildings may block reception in areas within the line-of-sight range which can be achieved in open countryside free of obstructions. The approximate line-of-sight distance to the radio horizon can be estimated from : horizon in kilometers = 3.569 times the square root of the antenna height in meters.
There are other factors that affect the range of a two-way radio such as weather, exact frequency used, and obstructions.
Read more about this topic: Two-way Radio
Famous quotes containing the word range:
“Compared to football, baseball is almost an Oriental game, minimizing individual stardom, requiring a wide range of aggressive and defensive skills, and filled with long periods of inaction and irresolution. It has no time limitations. Football, on the other hand, has immediate goals, resolution on every single play, and a lot of violence—itself a highlight. It has clearly distinguishable hierarchies: heroes and drones.”
—Jerry Mander, U.S. advertising executive, author. Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, ch. 15, Morrow (1978)
“Whereas children can learn from their interactions with their parents how to get along in one sort of social hierarchy—that of the family—it is from their interactions with peers that they can best learn how to survive among equals in a wide range of social situations.”
—Zick Rubin (20th century)
“Narrowed-down by her early editors and anthologists, reduced to quaintness or spinsterish oddity by many of her commentators, sentimentalized, fallen-in-love with like some gnomic Garbo, still unread in the breadth and depth of her full range of work, she was, and is, a wonder to me when I try to imagine myself into that mind.”
—Adrienne Rich (b. 1929)