[Ham-80211] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz rules change

[doc]

 > Tim Gorman wrote:
> Point 2: 1 watt at 2.4Ghz is plenty of power to work all the way to the radio 
> horizon for most installations. Raising power levels to blast through 
> obstructions is NOT a good way of doing things, it shows poor engineering 
> judgment. Finding better paths and setting up mesh networks that will allow 
> routing around obstructions is a much better answer for almost all system 
> metrics - initial cost, operating cost, spectrum pollution, etc. 

I have to question the assumption underlying this
statement.

Much higher power than 1W will be necessary to maintain
solid communications for the following circumstances:

1.  Airborne obstructions, e.g. rain, snow, hail, sleet,
smoke, heavy mist, windblown dust, windblown pollen, etc.
(your airborne nuisance will depend on your QTH -- expect
more if you deploy in disaster-impacted locales)

2.  Antenna inefficiencies, e.g. snow or ice on the antenna,
the impact of various environmental sources such as acid
rain, soot, salt-containing rain or mist, etc., slight
misalignment due to unusual winds, etc.

3.  Seasonal changes, e.g. leaves not there when tests
were conducted show up in Spring, or new growth as a result
of taller bushes/trees, etc.

Yes, there are reasons for the availability of higher-
than-1W power levels and they may be more rather than
less frequent.

One key question goes to the mission-critical nature
of making and holding the link and the capacity to
locate multiple versus one-to-one sites.

IMHO, when one absolutely positively has to make and
hold the contact and cannot count on multiple link
sites then one needs QRO.  The regs nor the spectrum
planning cannot preclude QRO or it makes the band
unreliable for mission critical apps.

-- 
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e  http://bibleseven.com
Ham Links: http://bibleseven.com/hl.html