Solar Flare
#2
Banned
RE: Solar Flare
When I was active in amateur radio, we used to love solar flares and the like. During one period, I sat it my driveway in San Diego, on my mobile rig, and listened to the "skip" work its way all the way from Hawaii, to the West Coast to the East Coast, and talked to New York during the period. Absolutley unheard of during normal periods.
Les
WA6EER
Les
WA6EER
#3
My Feedback: (11)
RE: Solar Flare
Rodney, you're going to have some of these guys hiding under thier beds with tinfoil hats
www.spaceweather.com has info and a movie of it leaving the sun.
www.spaceweather.com has info and a movie of it leaving the sun.
#4
Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Grinnell,
IA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Solar Flare
ORIGINAL: dirtybird
There is a massive solar flare from the sun on the way to earth.
Do a careful range check. Especially if you use 72MHZ
Google solar flare for more info.
There is a massive solar flare from the sun on the way to earth.
Do a careful range check. Especially if you use 72MHZ
Google solar flare for more info.
It looks like to me that 2.4 is s just a much at risk as 72. Second paragraph states 'all wavelengths from radio to Gamma rays.' That includes 2.4
But you just have make it look like only 72 is affected.
S
#5
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Solar Flare
The lower the frequency the greater the atmospheric penetration of the energy.
If this were not true we would all be fried by the gamma rays in this burst.
72mhz is much lower in frequency than 2.4ghz.
Satellites use 3.0 ghz extensively, and are at risk, but they operate above the atmosphere and don't have its protection.
If this were not true we would all be fried by the gamma rays in this burst.
72mhz is much lower in frequency than 2.4ghz.
Satellites use 3.0 ghz extensively, and are at risk, but they operate above the atmosphere and don't have its protection.
#9
Banned
RE: Solar Flare
"Load up the Winnebago and head out for the desert! "
Don't have a Winnebago, but we did just get a Tioga, and the desert is not far from here:-)))))))))))))))
Les
Don't have a Winnebago, but we did just get a Tioga, and the desert is not far from here:-)))))))))))))))
Les
#11
#14
Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Grinnell,
IA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Solar Flare
ORIGINAL: dirtybird
The lower the frequency the greater the atmospheric penetration of the energy.
If this were not true we would all be fried by the gamma rays in this burst.
72mhz is much lower in frequency than 2.4ghz.
Satellites use 3.0 ghz extensively, and are at risk, but they operate above the atmosphere and don't have its protection.
The lower the frequency the greater the atmospheric penetration of the energy.
If this were not true we would all be fried by the gamma rays in this burst.
72mhz is much lower in frequency than 2.4ghz.
Satellites use 3.0 ghz extensively, and are at risk, but they operate above the atmosphere and don't have its protection.
#15
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Solar Flare
2.4 GHZ is not nearly as much at risk as 72mhz.
In the early 70's many Logictrol sets had their first two transistors burned out by a jolt from solar flares. The receiver had to be modified to prevent that.
Check this out:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1391441
In the early 70's many Logictrol sets had their first two transistors burned out by a jolt from solar flares. The receiver had to be modified to prevent that.
Check this out:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1391441