ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Some San Antonio Scans  (Read 1936 times)

Andrew Outlaw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
Some San Antonio Scans
« on: April 11, 2016, 10:42:55 am »

So I'm here at a resort just outside of San Antonio, Nice view up on one of the highest hills in the area, and I wanted to share some scans I took and talk about them a little bit. These were just taken on my RF Explorer, so not super good resolution. I've got to say though, the noise floor was higher and rf more crowded than I expected for San Antonio. I assume that is due to the high location, lack of shielding from other hills buildings and trees, close proximity to six flags, and the fact that even far away, I can see lots of transmit towers on other hills.

So the first is this scan outside of the 2.4g range. There is a signal I picked up at around 2437mhz -60dbm, and I've never seen a singular signal of that high output in the 2.4g range, so I was wondering if anyone had some hypothesis on what that could be?

The other 2 scans were taken outside of the venue, one in the front, which is the side that faces San Antonio, and one on the opposite side. Dramatically different results. That's not surprising, the building will mostly block the transmitters that are on the other side. The sweep does look a little denser to me on the front scan, and my theory about that is that is the side the Six Flags is on (just at the bottom of the hill). One thing that bothers me is the border of channel 43 and 44 on the front scan. I take the scans in 60mhz chunks, so one scan ends at 44, and the other begins at 44. Still that sharp of a drop off is kind of odd. It's entirely possible that there is a DTV broadcast on 43 that doesn't spill over, but I would imagine the noise floor would kind of taper off from that, even in a separate scan retuned to a different chunk of frequencies. I imagine it's probably either just my RF Explorer, or there was a change in level of signal in the time between the 2 scans(they are also averaged scans, which an average of 5 scans is about 21 seconds on an RF Explorer). I plan to go scan across the 2 later to see what's really going on and I will post that.

Please let me know your thoughts, comments and opinions. I will be at this venue until Wed afternoon, so if anyone wants me to take different or more specific scans let me know.
Logged

Brad Harris

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
Re: Some San Antonio Scans
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2016, 04:22:29 pm »

...... I take the scans in 60mhz chunks, so one scan ends at 44, and the other begins at 44. .....


Hi Andrew,


Is there any particular reason with Vantage you're not doing full UHF bandwidth scans (470-698MHz)? The RBW is the same regardless of span size (25KHz) in the program (unlike the handheld unit an other software)




BRad
Logged

Andrew Outlaw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
Re: Some San Antonio Scans
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2016, 10:56:06 am »


Hi Andrew,


Is there any particular reason with Vantage you're not doing full UHF bandwidth scans (470-698MHz)? The RBW is the same regardless of span size (25KHz) in the program (unlike the handheld unit an other software)




BRad

I started contributing to Pete's site and that's just the way he said he wanted them. I guess w/ Vantage it's not as important though.
Logged

Pete Erskine

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1355
    • Best Audio
Re: Some San Antonio Scans
« Reply #3 on: April 13, 2016, 12:26:49 pm »

I started contributing to Pete's site and that's just the way he said he wanted them. I guess w/ Vantage it's not as important though.

Full BW is fine for me as long as its compat for WB and IAS.

Sometimes I have been fooled by locations like this.  My TTI is easily overloaded and the R&S is too if I have the preamp on.  If I shorten the antenna to 10 " from 20" I have less of a noise floor which Also shows when I am looking at 1MHZ BW for specific freqs.

Also in locations like this I dont use any amplified RX antennas which easily overload from hi noise floor.  If I am running a long antenna cable and need gain I put it at the rack not the Antenna so the loss in the cable protects the preamp.

What did your specific freqs look like?
Logged
Pete Erskine
917-750-1134
www.bestaudio.com
peter@bestaudio.com

Andrew Outlaw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
Re: Some San Antonio Scans
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2016, 09:24:33 am »

Full BW is fine for me as long as its compat for WB and IAS.

Sometimes I have been fooled by locations like this.  My TTI is easily overloaded and the R&S is too if I have the preamp on.  If I shorten the antenna to 10 " from 20" I have less of a noise floor which Also shows when I am looking at 1MHZ BW for specific freqs.

Also in locations like this I dont use any amplified RX antennas which easily overload from hi noise floor.  If I am running a long antenna cable and need gain I put it at the rack not the Antenna so the loss in the cable protects the preamp.

What did your specific freqs look like?

I was just using the nagoya NA773 antenna that comes with the RF Explorer, and I didn't think about shortening it, but that makes a lot of sense.

I didn't really know what to make of the outside scans, so I used some inside ones that had a much lower noise floor to do my coordination as I could actually see where the DTV's were. Here is a screen of what I ended up with:
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Some San Antonio Scans
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2016, 09:24:33 am »


Pages: [1]   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.045 seconds with 24 queries.