Silly thought. 802.11 - meteor bounce?

Could this in theory work?
I assume you'd need a vastly boosted signal.

Ian Stirling wrote:
> Could this in theory work?
> I assume you'd need a vastly boosted signal.
Suggest you do a search for "EME" and "Moonbounce" to see what problems
could occur e.g. Latency.
Given the speed of meteors what sort of tracking system are you going to
use for your Antennas and depending on the direction of the meteors what
about the effect of "Doppler Shift"

Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>Could this in theory work?
>I assume you'd need a vastly boosted signal.

It works but you need short bursts of data, a protocol that can handle
large latencies, specialized software, and lots of transmit power. The
signal is not bounce off the meteorites, but off the ionization trail
in the atmosphere. Search Google for "meteor scatter" for details on
how various groups are using this mode of propgation. Note that "high
speed" meteor scatter means Morse code at perhaps 5 words per minute
average thruput.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Bob II <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>Given the speed of meteors what sort of tracking system are you going to
>use for your Antennas and depending on the direction of the meteors what
>about the effect of "Doppler Shift"

Meteor scatter does not bounce the signal off the meteorite, but uses
the ionization trail, that can persist for a few seconds to several
minutes. The meteorite is moving, but the ionization does not move.
Therefore, no doppler compensation is required. The trails are long
enough to support reflections mostly in the VHF (50-450Mhz) region.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_trail

Drivel: It's really a meteoroid while it's still in the atmosphere.
It only becomes a meteorite when it hits the ground. When it leaves a
bright trail, it's a meteor. If it's a big rock, it's a bolide.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Bob II <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>
>> Given the speed of meteors what sort of tracking system are you going to
>> use for your Antennas and depending on the direction of the meteors what
>> about the effect of "Doppler Shift"
>
> Meteor scatter does not bounce the signal off the meteorite, but uses
> the ionization trail, that can persist for a few seconds to several
> minutes. The meteorite is moving, but the ionization does not move.
> Therefore, no doppler compensation is required.
>
http://www.radio-electronics.com/inf...or_scatter.php

Doppler shift
When using meteor scatter or meteor burst communications it is found
that the signals that are received are subject to a Doppler shift. This
arises because the point where the signal is reflected changes as the
meteor moves forwards and new ionisation is created, and the trail
behind it diffuses. This can give a shift in frequency of as much as 2
kHz on the higher frequency bands although it is correspondingly lower
for the lower frequency bands.


The trails are long
> enough to support reflections mostly in the VHF (50-450Mhz) region.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionization_trail
>
> Drivel: It's really a meteoroid while it's still in the atmosphere.
> It only becomes a meteorite when it hits the ground. When it leaves a
> bright trail, it's a meteor. If it's a big rock, it's a bolide.
>

Bob II <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Bob II <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>>
>>> Given the speed of meteors what sort of tracking system are you going to
>>> use for your Antennas and depending on the direction of the meteors what
>>> about the effect of "Doppler Shift"
>>
>> Meteor scatter does not bounce the signal off the meteorite, but uses
>> the ionization trail, that can persist for a few seconds to several
>> minutes. The meteorite is moving, but the ionization does not move.
>> Therefore, no doppler compensation is required.
>>
>http://www.radio-electronics.com/inf...or_scatter.php
>
> Doppler shift
> When using meteor scatter or meteor burst communications it is found
>that the signals that are received are subject to a Doppler shift. This
>arises because the point where the signal is reflected changes as the
>meteor moves forwards and new ionisation is created, and the trail
>behind it diffuses. This can give a shift in frequency of as much as 2
>kHz on the higher frequency bands although it is correspondingly lower
>for the lower frequency bands.

I stand corrected. (I just hate it when that happens.) I guess the
ionization trail does effectively move.

When I was playing with 26MHz marine meteor scatter on in the late
1970's using Sitor, I didn't compensate for doppler. There was a
noticeable smearing of the signal which was caused by doppler, but it
didn't seem to affect error rate or data recovery much. The TNC
(terminal node controller) did have an AFC which could theoretically
compensate for some doppler shift but was far too slow to be useful
for doppler compensation. More often, it was just used to compensate
for frequency inaccuracy and drift.

Also, the test was a failure because the equipment necessary was
impractical, required far too much power, there was too much
interference from skip, and the thruput was very depressingly slow
(about 2 chars/sec).


--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558