On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:48:20 -0400, Walter Maxwell wrote:

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:10:52 -0400, jawod wrote:

I'm considering a weekend cabin on the Ohio River.

John, I'm glad you cleared up the question you just raised with the above
sentence. You see, property on the shore of the Ohio River is considerably
different than 'on the Ohio River'.

snip
Question 2:

Does significant flow in a body of water (in this case, the Ohio River)
represent a different dielectric than ground or non-flowing lake water?
How would it effect propagation from a vertical or other antenna system?

John
AB8O

Well John, the flow in a body of water would not change the dielectric constant,
but the signal arriving in the direction of the water flow would arrive earlier
than that arriving in the opposite direction. I'm sure measurements using the
inverse doppler principle would show a significant difference in the arrival
times, especially if the flow rate at the bottom equals that at the surface.

Walt, W2DU.

A caveat to the post above: An important issue concerning the above issue
escaped me during that writing. The inverse doppler principle is thwarted in
Pittsburgh at the point of confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers
that spawn the Ohio River, because those two rivers flow in different
directions, causing the measurement device to become confused in the Pittsburgh
area.

Walt, W2DU