Yuri, Kk3BU wrote:
"But when signals are going throug the ionosphere and considerable
distances, things don`t jive exactly like that."

Yuri is nost likely correct. Even line-of-sight paths experience strange
things.

Isotropic material has the same characteristics along any axis. Kraus
left himself an out by saying:
"It is assumed that the emfs are of the same frequency, and the medium
is linear, passive, and also isotropic." I think he implies that
reciprocity may not rule when the medium is as screwed up as it often is
in the ionosphere.

I had one nonreciprocal microwave path among a countless total in my
experience. It connected a rooftop in downtown Houston with the
company`s aircraft hanger at Houston International (now Bush) Airport.
The path ran from the company headquarters northward right up the street
in a canyon between skyscrapers, several of which had more than our 33
floors. The signal at the airport was stronger than that at headquarters
by several dB. As we had more than 40 dB fade margin in both directions,
I scratched my head but lost no sleep.

I have HF radio experience between Germany and Portugal while working in
shortwave broadcasting. We used HF for an order-wire between locations.
Signal strengths and path losses seemed to be nearly identical in both
directions. Transmitters were 3.5 KW Collins Auto-Tune all-purpose
AM/CW/MCW with a rotary phone dial to select mode and frequency.
Receivers were Hammerlund SP 600Xs.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 14 Jun, 13:33, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Yuri, Kk3BU wrote:

"But when signals are going throug the ionosphere and considerable
distances, things don`t jive exactly like that."

Yuri is nost likely correct. Even line-of-sight paths experience strange
things.

Isotropic material has the same characteristics along any axis. Kraus
left himself an out by saying:
"It is assumed that the emfs are of the same frequency, and the medium
is linear, passive, and also isotropic." I think he implies that
reciprocity may not rule when the medium is as screwed up as it often is
in the ionosphere.

I had one nonreciprocal microwave path among a countless total in my
experience. It connected a rooftop in downtown Houston with the
company`s aircraft hanger at Houston International (now Bush) Airport.
The path ran from the company headquarters northward right up the street
in a canyon between skyscrapers, several of which had more than our 33
floors. The signal at the airport was stronger than that at headquarters
by several dB. As we had more than 40 dB fade margin in both directions,
I scratched my head but lost no sleep.

I have HF radio experience between Germany and Portugal while working in
shortwave broadcasting. We used HF for an order-wire between locations.
Signal strengths and path losses seemed to be nearly identical in both
directions. Transmitters were 3.5 KW Collins Auto-Tune all-purpose
AM/CW/MCW with a rotary phone dial to select mode and frequency.
Receivers were Hammerlund SP 600Xs.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

You just proved my point! You 'cherry picked' a line to quote from
Kraus
to give yourself some sort of authority. The quote starts off with
"It is assumed.." Now you have added "I think"..... and now you
suggest that he "Kraus" "I think he implies" he meant something else.
You then went off subject thinking about the old days when Ham
radio was for real hams before your mind finally succumbed to sleep
again.What do you think you achieved with that posting that
you snitched? Does it reflect on the real you? "Signals strengths
and path losses seemed to be nearly identical" you also state.
Have you now switched back to "reprocity" or are you meaning
something else again? Possibly leaving yourself an "out"

Art wrote:
"What do you think you achieved with that posting that you snitched?"

I gave the book and the page number of an expert`s opinion that
reprocity usually rules with antennas.
Kraus says it again in the 3rd edition of "Antennas" on page 829:
"The transmitting and receiving patterns are the same."

"The power flow is the same either way."

Very plain talk.

Art doesn`t like my commentary. That`s his prerogative.

I`m not a typist so I avoid repeating where I can, but I try to be
accurate.

I believe there are nonreciprocal paths because I`ve seen one as I wrote
in my earlier posting.

I`ve measured hundreds of microwave paths using very accurate
instruments. Almost always they were completely reciprocal. I`ve seen as
many HF paths but rarely used anything beyond an "S" meter to measure
them. Not much point when the medium itself varies so much.You need
accuracy to prove a new antenna though. I`ve done that by comparison
weith a known standard. I switched between the antennas every 5 minutes
while continuously recording the distant signal strength. I then
averaged the results and compared them. The results were as predicted by
the calculations.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:
I believe there are nonreciprocal paths because I`ve seen one as I wrote
in my earlier posting.

I've never heard anyone talking back to WTAW. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On 15 Jun, 06:17, Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
I believe there are nonreciprocal paths because I`ve seen one as I wrote
in my earlier posting.

I've never heard anyone talking back to WTAW. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

A book on Politics is one way to learn about propagation
especially when one side is not listening