On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 19:14:32 -0800, miso wrote:

My recollection of Radio Mobile is you need to crank down the minimum
angle that it sweeps to get any accuracy.

True. 1 degree resolution at perhaps 20km is:
tan(1deg) * 20km = 350 meters
resolution. Not great resolution, but good enough for wide area
coverage. For wi-fi, the range is much less, so the "squares" shown
on the map will be correspondingly smaller.

Samples of wide coverage area RM calcs.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/coverage/k6bj/
We recently moved our tower and antenna, when the building that
previously supported them was demolished. So, I recalculated the
coverage. I believe I used 1 degree resolution.

than SPLAT, which requires compilation parameters to set the array size.
Radio Mobile, at least when I read it, was stuck at 3600x3600. If you
exceed that array, and note it uses a 1/3 arc second grid, the program
interpolates.

I'm too lazy to check the numbers right now. Maybe tomorrow.
Meanwhile, this article claims that Splat is limited to 3600x3600
while Radio-Mobile is limited to 2000x2000. No clue at this time
who's correct.

I have a 90 mile path to analyze, so I guess I'll see what these
programs can do lately. But if Radio Mobile is stuck at 3600 pixels,
that is a show stopper.

A 90 mile PATH (line) is quite different from a 90 mile radius
coverage (area) radius.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS