Does UHF curve the horizon?

New LoRa world record: 1336 km / 830 mi

I would like to answer a question I have

New LoRa world record: 1336 km / 830 mi
How could such a length be reached taking into account that UHF requires a straight line, what happens with the cut on the horizon?
Internally I read that it could be due to the rebound in the ionosphere
I would like to find more accurate information, could someone guide me or point me to a document that will help me?

Thanks in advance and best regards

High altitude balloon :balloon::wink:

You’d like to think, but no, it was a fishing vessel & a buoy - so all at sea level.

As you say in one of your other posts today, the short answer is the mysteries of the universe and general RF weirdness.

Sometimes atmospherics can just make for the right conditions - a couple of packets get reflected just right and hey presto, suddenly there is a new world record.

Maybe @gamba101 could clarify their interest - if it’s to replicate the range for an application then you’d expect people to be getting 1000+ km on a regular basis and this new 1336km is the new stretch goal - but it’s not, it’s a total outlier.

My bad….missed the recent news with new record and saw the 830miles and confused with the April 2020 832km record for Thomas Telkamp’s HAB record….should have read slower!

Note, not only did that one use a node on a HAB, it also had the GW on a tall tower….on top of a mountain! :man_shrugging: :slight_smile:

Sorry, I’m not familiar with some terms.
What is HAB and GW?

there are no mysteries around rf all of these phenomena are well describe in science

ground waves and atmospheric duct

Atmospheric duct - Wikipedia.

i do ais work and we see regularly rf links as long as 1000km they are not reliable as you will not see them every day nor at the same time of day as it is weather dependent

you dont see many reports in the lora world on 1000km distances as very few ships have lora based rf equipment on board

if you had a lora transmitter on voyager 1 you most probably will still be receiving packets … wait a min the battery will be flat by now

High Altitude Balloon and Gateway.

Unusual atmospheric conditions that allow for such long distances are extremly rare, which is very fortunate. If the freak conditions resulting in the 1336km were common then TTN\LoRaWAN would probably not work, since each Gateway would be overwhelmed picking up signals from so many nodes. Think about it, imagine every Gateway in Amsterdam each receiving signals from most every node in Europe.

Not needed - and still going strong! NASA done well with what was basically now >50 year old tech (actual launch over 46 years ago), and running off a nuclear/thermal source vs standard batteries, even so to keep working they have gradually had to shut down sensors and compute/comms capability…exited Sun’s influence (Heliosphere barrier) nearly a decade ago and now in deeper space (sister ship on alternate route went out of Sun’s influence about 5 years ago also), still transmitting… Anyone interested in progress might look at this article…

and for a recent near miss/ooops! story with V2 this one… good recovery… there are many other stories inbetween and since also (GIYF)

Project scientist finally retired this time last year - after 50+years with NASA…

…and to think we often have angst over a remote firmware update or other s/w maintenance for a node or a GW the other side of a town, a county or even country… we kneel before these engineers of old!

All off topic for TTN I know but interesting/inspiring none the less! And closer to home for the real LoRa distance record use your favourite search engine to find the ESA/Telkamp moon bounce using the tech! :wink:

Update: actually remembered story was released 2 years ago this month so couldnt resist digging out the story and reposting:

i meant one of our nodes running a standard setup will be flat by now

i am full aware on the design of voyager 1 it is amazing how long a nuclear power source can last

did you see the bit rate it operates at

Yep more seconds per bit than bits per second (with massive error correction and redundancy) that we are used to discussing; so perhaps less bit/rate more rate/bit! :rofl: