Subj : Re: Moon bounce
To   : alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf
From : Dale Parfitt
Date : Tue Oct 18 2005 05:08:39

From Newsgroup: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf


"Roger" <Delete-Invallid.stuff.groups@tm.net> wrote in message 
news:ibj8l19tgr9ego1qkl41hj171h23tc9mn0@4ax.com...
> On 17 Oct 2005 13:16:54 -0700, "an old friend" <kb9rqz@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> snip>
>>> > Also a lot of what I have read talks about using
>>> >2M to do the moon bounce, wouldn't a higher frequency work better?
>>>
>>> Yes, 432 and higher can help make the antennas smaller but then
>>> you run into feedline losses and getting low noise recievers.   So
>>> there are conflicting tradeoffs.
>
> You also run into higher atmospheric absorption.

Not true, at least at VHF and UHF:
Atmospheric absorption is  a non factor in all weather conditions from VHF 
into the lower microwave bands.
At 10GHz and higher, absorption from atmospheric oxygen and water vapor 
begin to come into play.

Dale W4OP

.