| From: | shadowrn@*********.com (Rich Stokes) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Signal locator rating |
| Date: | Thu Mar 28 04:50:01 2002 |
> > more powerful signal travels farther and is less prone to signal noise.
> > Therefore high powered signals can be protected to jamming and ecm.
>
>Yes, but the _locator_ doesn't need to send a signal. It's just like a
>radio, and you don't receive a radio station better because you have a
>bigger radio...
But you do get a better signal if you have a better aerial. You don't
really notice it with a transistor radio because the signal you are
receiving is so strong and so stable that your equipment "rating" maxes out
and becomes pointless very quickly. If you are on a ship in the middle of
the atlantic, you need a massive aerial to get communication signals (and
these days you use satellite because it's far easier and lighter, but 30
years ago...)
Ever tried using a CB radio? Crap aren't they, especially when you compare
them to a regular FM music station? I could go to Toys R Us and buy a
Phantom Menace walkie talkie set for 10 quid (plus batteries) but it
wouldn't work worth squat if I was too far away to shout. On the other
hand the radios installed in taxi's are far better and work all over
town. They're for bigger and more expensive though. The ones that all
police officers use (at least in London) have a very clear reception and
transmission, but cost many times more and are (fairly) portable.
The same ought to be true of a tracking signal. It would have to be a weak
signal so the detection equipment would have to be very good to actually
get a signal. Rating would be how good the locator was at picking up the
signal.
