Talk:Tropospheric propagation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Marked as duplicate / proposed merge[edit]

I have marked this as a duplicate/proposed merge of Tropospheric scatter article. It is my belief that these two articles describe different applications of the same propagation mode and are small enough to practically merge as one article. Discuss here.Defrector (talk) 11:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

DX?[edit]

DX needs defining or linking to where it is defined. 90.212.251.246 (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Linked on section header to main article about DXing. --milonica (talk) 22:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This article also doesn't say how the EM waves actually reflect off the troposphere. What is the EM energy inteacting with to cause the reflection. A little bit of physics goes a long way. -anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.137.245.208 (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

there was no link on the section header to the article about DXing. if there was one, someone deleted it. i put it back in. i also added a one sentence explanation of DXing at the top of the section.Colbey84 (talk) 02:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Notable tropospheric DX receptions[edit]

Several entries have no citations. I've tagged them, and will soon delete any which remain unsourced.   Will Beback  talk  01:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Going twice.   Will Beback  talk  07:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I second the deletion of unreferenced entries. --ḾỊḼʘɴίcảTalkI DX for fun! 07:38, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Seeing no other comments, I've moved the unsourced entries here. Any entry can be restored with sources, if found.   Will Beback  talk  07:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


Additional unsourced notable reception[edit]

Any objections to removing this seemingly impossible reception? Unless I see a source, I have a very hard time believing such a thing was possible

Questionable grammar?[edit]

This part of the article "while with tropospheric-bending, stable signals with good signal strength from 500+ miles (800+ km) away are not common when the HA JA JA index of the atmosphere is fairly high." doesn't seem right... I suspect its supposed to read "are not uncommon when" ... ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.156.205.173 (talk) 07:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

exactly why i came here. it seems that it should be "not UNcommon". i'm very tempted to change it, especially since the previous question about it has gone unanswered for over 3 years. however, the "...WHILE with tropospheric-bending" makes me hesitate. that phrasing would normally indicate a DIFFERENCE from the first part of the sentence, (which discussed tropo-ducting). with no further discussion about tropo-bending, i find it difficult to understand the difference.
i get that tropo-bending is a form of tropo-propagation (where "running into" a "wall" of warmer air causes the signal to "bend" around the globe rather than continuing in a straight line). is it that tropo-ducting is a form of tropo-propagation, and tropo-bending is a form of tropo-ducting??
if that's correct, the sentence is still confusing. with the "WHILE," maybe it should be referring to different frequencies?? meaning, the 1st part of the sentence is about UHF signals being picked up 800 miles away, and the 2nd half is about VHF signals being picked up 500 miles away??
and, if THAT'S correct, it should STILL be "UNcommon."Colbey84 (talk) 02:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)