• Large scale RF shielding

    From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 5 11:46:13 2022
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Larkin@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 5 15:08:07 2022
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    --

    If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
    but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 5 14:18:39 2022
    Don WHY? wrote:
    =============

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)


    ** Like all of your trolls, the crucial facts are missing.

    If the path to the transmitters is really " unobstructed " and short range, your story is 100% non credible.
    What is the REAL story ?

    BTW:
    Do you wear a tin hat ?


    ...... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadenc@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Thu May 5 22:19:51 2022
    John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news:sfi87htnmuc8c1u3qrj87dltg6ng9468ji@4ax.com:

    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y
    <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead,
    plumbing in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if
    there is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different
    construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to
    build a good EMI screen room.

    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.


    Yes. Try to build one and it leaks so bad you can "hear" a pin drop
    onto a magnet halfway around the world.

    This sounds more like cell towers that are turned way down on power
    due to low utilization of that node.

    I remember placing a lot of copper tape to make our quiet cage
    'clean'. Have to have a pretty heavy tip on that solder iron too.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Thu May 5 22:08:06 2022
    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and
    won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess
    of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs


    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Clifford Heath@21:1/5 to Phil Hobbs on Fri May 6 12:55:30 2022
    On 6/5/22 12:08 pm, Phil Hobbs wrote:
    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF.  OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy".  GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones.  (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1.  How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2.  How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
         (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls.  Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?).  All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab.  Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess
    of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner.  Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup.  People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    NASA uses a passive repeater like that for the moon landings,
    to get signals from Honeysuckle Creek tracking station to the Deep Space Network site at Tidbinbilla. They had a wired connection as well (just a
    single telecoms cable pair), following the requirement for everything to
    be double-redundant. There was a microwave link to Parkes somewhere too.

    The repeater tower is probably still there: <https://goo.gl/maps/Syw2AFNo6fxuqn97A>

    There was also a collimating target for aligning the antenna down to the south-west. It's all pretty deep in the mountains, for radio quietness.
    The Orroral Valley orbital tracking site is south of Honeysuckle too.
    All the structures down to ground level have been removed now, except at Tidbinbilla.

    Clifford Heath.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jan Panteltje@21:1/5 to blockedofcourse@foo.invalid on Fri May 6 06:28:31 2022
    On a sunny day (Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700) it happened Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote in <t5162c$s9f$1@dont-email.me>:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Some double glazing also stops RF, I tried my satellite dish inside behind such a window,
    almost no signal...

    Solution, as the dedicated greens will know, is to live in a tent or what's it called 'wigwam'?

    Be glad all that RF is attenuated indoors, it interferes with the brain.
    Some people get sick from it.
    That said LOL I have been exposed ... a lot, So you see the bad effects it can have.

    My 4G internet just uses an USB stick in the window, inserted in an Raspberry Pi programmed as router:
    http://panteltje.com/pub/4G_toren_IMG_7385.JPG
    Spaghetti is supposed to be in that vase..

    phones works indoors here..
    If not I would get a landline...
    Even DVB-T2 (latest terrestrial TV) works with a simple indoors antenna:
    http://panteltje.com/pub/DVB-T2_antenna_IXIMG_0757.JPG
    transmitter is miles away....
    GPS works, but better upstairs, not always enough sats for positioning downstairs.

    Maybe you could get a simple signal strength meter and walk around the house to see where and what attenuates things?
    Radio with signal strength indicator, I think even one of my phones
    has a signal strength bar?

    Depends on the frequency you want to check..
    Spectrum analyzer, using a RTL-SDR stick will show a lot from about 20 MHz up to 1.4 GHz..
    http://panteltje.com/panteltje/xpsa/index.html
    lots of open source software for it, get a 1 ppm one from ebay for about 30 USD.
    plug into you laptop with a 15 cm piece of wire as antenna, works perfectly.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeff Layman@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri May 6 08:51:49 2022
    On 05/05/2022 19:46, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    As others have suggested, I'd also go with the metal foil as the
    problem, especially as it seems to cover the whole spectrum from a few
    10s of kHz (radio clocks) to the GHz range of cellphones. Do you have
    any wooden doors on the cellphone tower side of the house? Is the
    cellphone signal level any better "through" those doors than through the
    house walls? All bets are off if you have metal flyscreens over the doors!

    You can get cellphone boosters which have an external antenna and carry
    the signal indoors, but they would only help with cellphone frequencies.
    Would an external long-wire antenna with a loop wrapped round your radio
    clock help with that signal?

    --

    Jeff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri May 6 10:46:00 2022
    On 05/05/2022 19:46, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF.  OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy".  GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    That's a bit surprising.

    My house is solid wall three bricks thick and I still get enough RF in
    through the windows for it not to be a problem. They are low emissivity
    windows too now so I did wonder about it when they were replaced.

    The only exception is DAB radio (crock of sh*t) and 2FA texts which
    sometimes take forever to arrive (so that the website times out before
    it arrives). Voice mobile calls are usually OK indoors.

    Trying to get a 2FA code I sometime end up walking around the highest
    part of the garden waving my phone high in the air to get signal.

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones.  (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    Is there no equivalent of this site in the USA?

    https://www.signalchecker.co.uk

    Quick overview of what is available and it has links to individual
    mobile networks claims as to coverage at your location.

    To give is a whirl put in a random postcode like TS1 1AA.
    (that's a fairly non-descript northern city Middlesbrough)

    M2 2AA is in Manchester with much better 5G coverage

    SW1A 1AA is in London, PM's residence and is as good as it gets.

    Or put your phone into engineering diagnostic mode (at your own risk)
    and you can see carrier details and signal levels in real time then walk
    round to local masts to see which is which. You might need to do it with
    a few phones on different networks to get a full picture if they share.

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1.  How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal

    Glass windows usually do that for you.

    2.  How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
        (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls.  Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?).  All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab.  Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    I'd have thought that a thin layer of aluminium foil or conductive paint
    would go a long way to providing a decent level of RF attenuation.

    ISTR if you are serious about it then you pretty much have to have
    welded sheet metal construction and beryllium spring copper contacts on
    all the doors (usually only one double width door on a Faraday cage
    room) and fancy suppressors on any cables in or out.

    Might be easier to start out with a Ford transit van than a house.

    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical. on Fri May 6 07:08:10 2022
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 22:08:06 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and >won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess
    of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    RF is hard to believe. My key fob will unlock my car from half a block
    away. We get pictures back from Jupiter. Seems improbable.



    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Fri May 6 17:27:55 2022
    On 2022-05-06 16:08, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 22:08:06 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and
    won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess
    of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    RF is hard to believe. My key fob will unlock my car from half a block
    away. We get pictures back from Jupiter. Seems improbable.




    It screams very loudly in a medium we cannot perceive. Imagine what
    it would be like if we could hear RF.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to jeroen@nospam.please on Fri May 6 09:04:39 2022
    On Fri, 06 May 2022 17:27:55 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
    <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

    On 2022-05-06 16:08, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 22:08:06 -0400, Phil Hobbs
    <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> >>>> wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing >>>>> in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and >>> won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess >>> of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    RF is hard to believe. My key fob will unlock my car from half a block
    away. We get pictures back from Jupiter. Seems improbable.




    It screams very loudly in a medium we cannot perceive. Imagine what
    it would be like if we could hear RF.

    Jeroen Belleman


    From the roof of Highland World Headquarters I count about 40 dishes
    visible with my terrible eyesight. Wouldn't it be cool if the beams
    glowed at night.

    Our internet service is a small dish. We paid for 50+50 Mbps and get
    500+500.



    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Fri May 6 10:02:00 2022
    On 5/6/2022 9:31 AM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    That kind of construction is not common in the US.

    Depends on which part of the country you're located. Here, wooden-framed
    homes are an exception. I've never encountered a home with a basement.
    Attic spaces are solely to decorate the "elevation" (roof pitch is too
    low due to lack of snow carrying requirement).

    Some adobe and straw-bale homes have walls 18" thick.

    But my house is stucco over expanded metal lath, so it does a pretty
    good job of blocking cellphone signals.

    Stucco over masonry, here. Stucco over lath over wood for framed
    portions of homes (e.g., exterior wet walls).

    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Where do they take the cars to? The tracking will start working once delivered and out in the open, unless they are able to disable all possibilities. So I'm assuming that it is some place without
    extradition.

    Or, part them out before they can be found.

    Here, a stolen car is in MX in less than an hour. Even cars that have
    been legitimately *sold* may never see a formal title transfer (e.g.,
    if the buyer intends to use it in a crime; think smuggling).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Fri May 6 09:53:16 2022
    On 5/6/2022 2:46 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 05/05/2022 19:46, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    That's a bit surprising.

    My house is solid wall three bricks thick and I still get enough RF in through
    the windows for it not to be a problem. They are low emissivity windows too now
    so I did wonder about it when they were replaced.

    The only exception is DAB radio (crock of sh*t) and 2FA texts which sometimes take forever to arrive (so that the website times out before it arrives). Voice
    mobile calls are usually OK indoors.

    Trying to get a 2FA code I sometime end up walking around the highest part of the garden waving my phone high in the air to get signal.

    We only have views of the horizon through our windows. Most tend to have very *deep* "coverings" (like porches) to block the sunlight from entering the house when overhead. E.g., I can't see "overhead sky" while indoors. Instead, we see other neighbors' homes.

    To get a GPS fix, I have to be outside. Likewise, while garaged, the car doesn't know where it is -- beyond remembering its last position. I've
    tried this with two (similar) handhelds -- an eTrex Vista and an eTrex
    Magellan (hacked to power from an external DC source) -- which I imagine are very similar in design (?). Likewise, a pair of "dash mount" Garmins -- a
    Nuvi 260W and a Nuvi 750 that also suggest some similarities between themselves.

    In each case, I set the UUT (only one at a time!) in the center of the living room floor (the room with the least bit of RFI and nothing on the roof, above). I waited 30 minutes for a fix. Then, moved on to the next unit. Nada.
    Yet all will quickly acquire satellites and yield a fix within a minute or
    two of being clear of the building. (84 seconds for the Vista, just now,
    from being powered on from a state where "no batteries installed")

    I suspect there's a buttload of RFI in most modern homes -- computers, CFL/LED lights, dimmers, electronic appliances, etc. -- that contributes to poorer reception.

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    Is there no equivalent of this site in the USA?

    https://www.signalchecker.co.uk

    Dunno. I don't use a cell phone for communications; I use them as
    clocks, PMPs, cameras, TELNET/HTTP terminals... anything BUT a phone!
    The idea of people being able to pester me at THEIR convenience,
    regardless of where I am or what I am doing is anathema to me!
    "Send me an email, I'll get back to you at MY convenience!" (and,
    of course, THEY can reply to that at THEIR convenience)

    My cell phone observations come from noticing the behaviors of my
    neighbors -- who all step outside to take calls. If they were all
    having clandestine "affairs" and didn't want their spouses to know,
    I could understand bearing the "cost" of doing that. In the winter,
    this is possibly understandable (nice weather) but silly from
    ~May thru ~Sept (our first 100F day was a week or so ago).

    I've no idea as to which carriers they use -- nor the operators
    of the nearest cell towers (I can see at least three of them
    within ~0.75 mi of my home... not counting others that may be
    less noticeable -- or, located away from the roads I typically
    travel). But, the topography, locally, is pretty irregular;
    some of the antennae are actually *below* me in elevation (so,
    I see their signal *through* scores of homes) others above.

    There's a site that lists antennae/towers in the area -- it
    claims 33 towers and 200+ antennae within 3 miles of my location
    (no idea why it settled on that 3 mi figure). But, I notice that
    it has no record of the three towers that I know for a fact to
    be present! <shrug>

    Quick overview of what is available and it has links to individual mobile networks claims as to coverage at your location.

    To give is a whirl put in a random postcode like TS1 1AA.
    (that's a fairly non-descript northern city Middlesbrough)

    M2 2AA is in Manchester with much better 5G coverage

    SW1A 1AA is in London, PM's residence and is as good as it gets.

    Or put your phone into engineering diagnostic mode (at your own risk) and you can see carrier details and signal levels in real time then walk round to local
    masts to see which is which. You might need to do it with a few phones on different networks to get a full picture if they share.

    I'm not that interested :> My interest lies in sorting out what
    construction characteristics have had the side-effect of *hindering*
    reception -- with an eye towards using those (presumably inexpensive, run-of-the-mill) approaches to attenuate interference between adjacent
    "RF domains" (think apartment house, hotel, resort, office building,
    etc. where you can expect folks to be operating their own kit
    "very close" to "your NONEXCLUSIVE RF-space")

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal

    Glass windows usually do that for you.

    One side of the house is essentially "all/mostly glass" (floor
    to ceiling). Another side has a single small window. The
    third has just two windows while the last has *none*.

    And, windows only look *out*, not up.

    I suspect WWV (our time reference) is problematic due to our
    location in the "RF shadow" of the nearby mountain range
    (it's a 6000 ft change in elevation beginning just north of
    our location; i.e., we are in the low spot of the valley).

    OTOH, I don't understand why OTA broadcasts (TV/radio) are
    so problematic. If I had a powerful enough laser, I could
    illuminate the 5 towers atop that mountain without the beam
    touching anything along the way ("unobstructed").

    If I drop the antennae (from the roof) into the house at the
    same points (i.e., so the azimuth to the towers is unchanged
    and the elevation only slightly so), I'll lose most of the signal.
    I.e., the pathlength has only increased by a few *feet*, no
    obstructions have been introduced -- just the structure of the
    house.

    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    I'd have thought that a thin layer of aluminium foil or conductive paint would
    go a long way to providing a decent level of RF attenuation.

    That seems to explain many of the "problems", here. Had the masonry walls
    been the issue, then that would be more challenging to reproduce, elsewhere.

    E.g., if a builder can substitute foil-clad drywall for regular drywall
    and pick up that level of attenuation, it suggests a minor/inexpensive
    change in construction can help tamp down RF sources from neighboring
    offices, apartments, suites, businesses, etc. And, something functionally similar to buffer signals coming through floors/ceilings (think 3D).

    ISTR if you are serious about it then you pretty much have to have welded sheet
    metal construction and beryllium spring copper contacts on all the doors (usually only one double width door on a Faraday cage room) and fancy suppressors on any cables in or out.

    Not interested in building a Faraday cage. Rather, would like to be able to reduce the "interference" caused by nearby users who happen to be using
    the same sort of kit. Without having to force them (FCC) to take
    extraordinary measures to tamp down their emissions.

    Might be easier to start out with a Ford transit van than a house.

    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a largish
    HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    One would think they would sort out where the antennae are located in each model and simply disable it BEFORE driving off with the goods! Or, pull power.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to '''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk on Fri May 6 12:31:02 2022
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    On 05/05/2022 19:46, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    That's a bit surprising.

    My house is solid wall three bricks thick and I still get enough RF in >through the windows for it not to be a problem. They are low emissivity >windows too now so I did wonder about it when they were replaced.

    The only exception is DAB radio (crock of sh*t) and 2FA texts which
    sometimes take forever to arrive (so that the website times out before
    it arrives). Voice mobile calls are usually OK indoors.

    Trying to get a 2FA code I sometime end up walking around the highest
    part of the garden waving my phone high in the air to get signal.

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    Is there no equivalent of this site in the USA?

    https://www.signalchecker.co.uk

    There are a number of them, but I don't know which ones are most
    reliable.


    Quick overview of what is available and it has links to individual
    mobile networks claims as to coverage at your location.

    To give is a whirl put in a random postcode like TS1 1AA.
    (that's a fairly non-descript northern city Middlesbrough)

    M2 2AA is in Manchester with much better 5G coverage

    SW1A 1AA is in London, PM's residence and is as good as it gets.

    Or put your phone into engineering diagnostic mode (at your own risk)
    and you can see carrier details and signal levels in real time then walk >round to local masts to see which is which. You might need to do it with
    a few phones on different networks to get a full picture if they share.

    I had not heard of this "engineering diagnostic mode". Turns out that
    my iPhone 8 supports it. I didn't see anything dangerous, although I
    didn't look all that hard.


    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal

    Glass windows usually do that for you.

    Yes, unless they have some kind of conductive film. Some do.


    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    That kind of construction is not common in the US.

    But my house is stucco over expanded metal lath, so it does a pretty
    good job of blocking cellphone signals.


    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    I'd have thought that a thin layer of aluminium foil or conductive paint >would go a long way to providing a decent level of RF attenuation.

    Yes, this is one way many big shielded rooms are done. The foil is
    quite thick, and there are multiple overlapping sheets, so the
    building can expand and contract with seasons without breaking the
    shielding.

    All wall penetrations are filtered and the filter bonded to the shield
    wall.

    The floor is more commonly overlapping sheets of thin galvanized
    steel.


    ISTR if you are serious about it then you pretty much have to have
    welded sheet metal construction and beryllium spring copper contacts on
    all the doors (usually only one double width door on a Faraday cage
    room) and fancy suppressors on any cables in or out.

    Yes.


    Might be easier to start out with a Ford transit van than a house.

    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a >largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Where do they take the cars to? The tracking will start working once
    delivered and out in the open, unless they are able to disable all possibilities. So I'm assuming that it is some place without
    extradition.

    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri May 6 13:43:59 2022
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-05-06 16:08, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 22:08:06 -0400, Phil Hobbs
    <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> >>>> wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing >>>>> in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and >>> won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess >>> of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    RF is hard to believe. My key fob will unlock my car from half a block
    away. We get pictures back from Jupiter. Seems improbable.




    It screams very loudly in a medium we cannot perceive. Imagine what
    it would be like if we could hear RF.

    Jeroen Belleman



    The main thing is the ease of getting huge intercepted areas with a
    single pair of wires (i.e. one port), and a contributing thing is the
    energy per photon.

    The etendue (area*solid angle product) of a single electromagnetic mode is

    E = lambda**2 / 2.

    If you need more etendue than that, i.e. either a wider acceptance angle
    or more intercepted arear antenna's throughput is higher than that, you
    have to use either multiple ports or incoherent detection. The SNR
    tradeoff involved in going to much shorter wavelength is fairly
    heartbreaking.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Jeff Layman on Fri May 6 10:27:32 2022
    On 5/6/2022 12:51 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
    On 05/05/2022 19:46, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    As others have suggested, I'd also go with the metal foil as the problem,

    and SOLUTION! :>

    especially as it seems to cover the whole spectrum from a few 10s of kHz (radio
    clocks) to the GHz range of cellphones. Do you have any wooden doors on the cellphone tower side of the house? Is the cellphone signal level any better "through" those doors than through the house walls? All bets are off if you have metal flyscreens over the doors!

    Dunno. As I said elsewhere, *I* don't use cellular comms. The *cordless* phones work everywhere in the house so we have no problem. But, friends
    and neighbors seem to resort to "stepping outside" when they have to make
    a call of any duration.

    I suspect they must keep their phones located "in a sweet spot" indoors
    lest they miss calls/texts (?). Or, resort to post-processing calls
    by checking their voicemail (apparently, calls are intercepted thusly
    in relatively short order... do they have to "run" to answer the phone
    sited in that "sweet spot"? -- we have "extensions" throughout the house)

    You can get cellphone boosters which have an external antenna and carry the signal indoors, but they would only help with cellphone frequencies. Would an external long-wire antenna with a loop wrapped round your radio clock help with
    that signal?

    I suspect it will have to be addressed by siting the antenna in a "good location", much like the OTA services (which folks may or may not use).
    I'm replacing it with an SDR so I can handle several different comm needs
    with a single radio. E.g., I only need a "time update" every month or two
    as I discipline my local "wall clock" with the AC mains. And, most folks
    don't worry about the accuracy of time to anything finer-grained than "a couple of minutes" -- largely because they are at the mercy of other folks' notion
    of "current time" in most interactions! If your boss thinks it's 8:03 when
    you show up for that 8:00 meeting, it doesn't matter if you pull out your cesium reference and "prove" to him that it's really 7:59 -- he'll still consider you late (and a wise-ass to boot!) Likewise, the airline decides
    when the 9:00 flight departs.

    [You only need better accuracy if you *know* -- e.g., contractually -- what reference the other party will be relying upon. And, need finer-grained synchronization only if the parties that must agree on a common time
    require such. E.g., most computer networks are fine with 1 second or
    worse as different machines are rarely needing to share a notion of
    time beyond what their users expect (the file server imposes its notion
    of "now" when you access/create one of its resources, regardless of
    what time YOU -- or your computer -- think it may be!) OTOH, if you have multiple SEPARATE processors working on a common problem, then tighter synchronization may be required -- if only to order observations and
    actions in time (A did something at A's notion of time and B did something
    at B's notion of time; which came first? Especially as processors get
    faster)]

    So, check the time at some "idle" time of day/night. Use the SDR for
    other purposes at other times (listening for pagers, door openers,
    broadcast radio, etc.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich S@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri May 6 11:03:15 2022
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.


    Re "1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal "
    These homes do not have windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent over a wide EM
    spectrum including RF...
    = RS

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich S@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri May 6 11:00:17 2022
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    uh, these homes lack windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent for RF

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Walliker@21:1/5 to Rich S on Fri May 6 12:33:37 2022
    On Friday, 6 May 2022 at 19:03:19 UTC+1, Rich S wrote:
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.
    Re "1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal "
    These homes do not have windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent over a wide EM
    spectrum including RF...

    Not necessarily when it has a thin metal coating to reflect infra-red radiation. Such glass is mandatory for all new windows here.

    John

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Allison@21:1/5 to John Larkin on Fri May 6 13:45:38 2022
    John Larkin wrote:
    ===============

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.


    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.
    ===========================================

    ** Why is no-one here considering the safety issue of NO usable RF inside one's home ?
    For a great many, that is not just inconvenient it is positively DANGEROUS.

    The use of mobiles ( ie cell phones ) has taken over from old wired phones using twisted pair
    and with modern broadband connections.
    The ability to make emergency calls from within one's home is ESSENTIAL.

    Faraday shielding residential properties needs to be made illegal.
    ==================================================

    ..... Phil

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Fri May 6 16:38:51 2022
    Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-05-06 16:08, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 22:08:06 -0400, Phil Hobbs
    <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> >>>> wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing >>>>> in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.

    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and >>> won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess >>> of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    One trick is to run a wire from outside (as a receive antenna) to
    inside (as a radiator). I've seen that done in tunnels.

    Yup. People have made passive VHF repeaters for amateur radio by
    putting antennas on each side of a mountain and just wiring them
    together with coax.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    RF is hard to believe. My key fob will unlock my car from half a block
    away. We get pictures back from Jupiter. Seems improbable.




    It screams very loudly in a medium we cannot perceive. Imagine what
    it would be like if we could hear RF.

    Jeroen Belleman



    [Fixed editing scars]

    The main thing is the ease of getting huge intercepted areas with a
    single pair of wires (i.e. one port), and a contributing thing is the
    energy per photon.

    The etendue (area*solid angle product) of a single electromagnetic mode is

    E = lambda**2 / 2.

    If you need more etendue than that, i.e. either a wider acceptance angle
    or more intercepted area, you have to use either multiple ports or
    incoherent detection. The SNR tradeoff involved in going to much
    shorter wavelength is fairly heartbreaking.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to Rich S on Fri May 6 16:40:33 2022
    Rich S wrote:
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    uh, these homes lack windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent for RF


    IIRC some have ITO or tin oxide coatings on the inner pane for lower IR emissivity. That can also be a reasonable RF shield.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Phil Hobbs on Fri May 6 13:58:57 2022
    On 5/6/2022 1:40 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
    Rich S wrote:

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    uh, these homes lack windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent for RF

    IIRC some have ITO or tin oxide coatings on the inner pane for lower IR emissivity. That can also be a reasonable RF shield.

    Exactly. We're not concerned with heat "leaking out" (like you'd be
    in northern climates) but, rather, leaking *in*. There's a different
    kind of coating (process) prefered -- "soft coat" -- that deposits
    a couple of fine layers of silver on the glass using magnetron sputtering
    vapor deposition. "Hard coat" is fused with the glass during its
    transition from liquid to "solid".

    And, windows only allow "radiation" in that is "directed" inward
    (hence the reason sunlight is shaded out by "wide" overhangs).

    Apparently it's much more effective (and comfortable) to step outside
    to talk than to stand in front of the window (?)...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 6 13:57:34 2022
    fredag den 6. maj 2022 kl. 04.08.18 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs:
    John Larkin wrote:
    On Thu, 5 May 2022 11:46:13 -0700, Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid>
    wrote:

    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    Must the the foil. What's strange is that it's really hard to build a
    good EMI screen room.
    It's the wallpaper effect--it won't stick when you're putting it up, and won't come off when you're taking it down. ;)

    40 dB loss is a pretty crappy screen room, but will reliably make a mess
    of cell phone communications.

    (We built a test jig out of a big beefy 5x9-inch aluminum die cast box
    whose lid attaches with a screw in each corner. Turns out that the
    RasPi inside communicates via wifi quite nicely. ;)


    we have used an old reefer container for setting up test in high temperatures it is two layers of steel but a cellphone works just fine inside

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 6 14:16:36 2022
    fredag den 6. maj 2022 kl. 22.40.45 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs:
    Rich S wrote:
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:
    Homes, here, tend to be reasonably opaque to RF. OTA broadcasts
    can only be received with a rooftop antenna (despite the fact
    that it's only a few unobstructed miles to the transmitters).
    Indoor FM reception is "iffy". GPSs can't get a fix (I've tried
    2 handheld units, 2 dash-mount plus the one built into the car).
    Even the two "atomic" clocks that I have spend all of their
    time "looking for signal" (or so they claim).

    And *everyone* steps outside to use their cell phones. (OK,
    maybe the neighborhood is a deadspot due to terrain -- despite
    antennas being reasonably close by -- though I've no way of
    knowing who is "operating" each of them)

    I.e., the "problem" isn't confined to our home.

    This begs two *different* questions:
    1. How to punch holes in <whatever> is attenuating the signal
    2. How to identify the cause of the problem to be able to
    (willingly) *reproduce* it in other places

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    uh, these homes lack windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent for RF


    IIRC some have ITO or tin oxide coatings on the inner pane for lower IR emissivity. That can also be a reasonable RF shield.
    Cheers

    afaiu some cars have the problem because the windows have a gold film between the layers for heating

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From keith@kjwdesigns.com@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri May 6 17:00:16 2022
    On Friday, 6 May 2022 at 10:28:07 UTC-7, Don Y wrote:
    ...
    Dunno. As I said elsewhere, *I* don't use cellular comms. The *cordless* phones work everywhere in the house so we have no problem. But, friends
    and neighbors seem to resort to "stepping outside" when they have to make
    a call of any duration.

    I suspect they must keep their phones located "in a sweet spot" indoors
    lest they miss calls/texts (?). Or, resort to post-processing calls
    by checking their voicemail (apparently, calls are intercepted thusly
    in relatively short order... do they have to "run" to answer the phone
    sited in that "sweet spot"? -- we have "extensions" throughout the house)
    ...

    Most phones and carriers these days support WiFi Calling where phone calls and SMS messages are routed over the internet as an alternate to wireless. The phone will (fairly) seamlessly switch between using WiFi and cellular radio as the relative signal
    strengths change or wifi service is available.

    The carriers still charge for time, even if they are using your own wifi.

    kw

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to ke...@kjwdesigns.com on Fri May 6 22:55:13 2022
    On 5/6/2022 5:00 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
    On Friday, 6 May 2022 at 10:28:07 UTC-7, Don Y wrote: ...
    Dunno. As I said elsewhere, *I* don't use cellular comms. The *cordless*
    phones work everywhere in the house so we have no problem. But, friends
    and neighbors seem to resort to "stepping outside" when they have to make
    a call of any duration.

    I suspect they must keep their phones located "in a sweet spot" indoors
    lest they miss calls/texts (?). Or, resort to post-processing calls by
    checking their voicemail (apparently, calls are intercepted thusly in
    relatively short order... do they have to "run" to answer the phone sited
    in that "sweet spot"? -- we have "extensions" throughout the house)
    ...

    Most phones and carriers these days support WiFi Calling where phone calls and SMS messages are routed over the internet as an alternate to wireless. The phone will (fairly) seamlessly switch between using WiFi and cellular radio as the relative signal strengths change or wifi service is available.

    The carriers still charge for time, even if they are using your own wifi.
    I have to assume that they either don't use this feature, don't know *how*
    to use this feature *or* that it is unreliable, as well (?)

    Speaking with a colleague two days ago and the call was dropped twice
    over the course of 30 minutes. I'm talking on copper wire so I doubt
    it's on my end!

    It seems that people now EXPECT calls to be unreliable whereas that
    was far from the case with older technology (batteries dying, dead spots,
    etc.)

    I'll be doing a VoIP port, soon, so I'll see what quirks *that* has.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Sat May 7 09:12:37 2022
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    Where do they take the cars to? The tracking will start working once delivered and out in the open, unless they are able to disable all possibilities. So I'm assuming that it is some place without
    extradition.

    They were very good at it. It was around y2k era. This isn't the right
    link but gives the general idea. They were eventually caught...

    https://www.expatica.com/be/uncategorized/car-theft-remains-high-in-belgium-83236/

    A search with the most obvious search terms got me nowhere.

    It was in the print media of the time (I was living in Belgium then).

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Phil Hobbs on Sat May 7 12:21:38 2022
    On 06/05/2022 21:40, Phil Hobbs wrote:
    Rich S wrote:
    On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:46:43 PM UTC, Don Y wrote:

    Most homes are masonry - 8-12" thick walls. Interior walls on
    the perimeter are firred out with drywall coated with aluminum
    foil (moisture barrier?). All internal wiring is overhead, plumbing
    in the slab. Different types of roofing so I'm unsure if there
    is a common thread, there.

    Ideally, there is a *cheap* way to get this sort of attenuation
    that can be retrofitted to existing homes of different construction.

    uh, these homes lack windows?
    Last I heard, glass is transparent for RF

    IIRC some have ITO or tin oxide coatings on the inner pane for lower IR emissivity.  That can also be a reasonable RF shield.

    Although it does and mine are low emissivity there seems to be very
    little attenuation at any of FM, DAB, Wifi or mobile phone frequencies.
    I guess it is thin enough that most wavelengths are unaffected.

    The stuff we had on the computer room windows for radio telescope
    control had woven copper mesh inside grounded at every edge and an
    airlock of two doors with all the fittings between the computer suite
    and the outside world. Its attenuation was good up to 32GHz which was as
    high as we could go. Door seals caused trouble from time to time.

    The computer sitting in the innermost really good windowless Faraday
    cage to protect IF stages and correlators from its interference. That
    was a cost no object lined with 1/16" copper sheet - it looked fabulous!
    (shame that the door was normally kept shut so no-one got to see it)

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sat May 7 10:23:24 2022
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to rbowman on Sun May 8 09:48:01 2022
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a >>>> largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute.  I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US  = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider.

    --
    Regards,
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mike Monett@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sun May 8 11:05:49 2022
    Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    [...]

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    Some background courtesy google:

    What are the different types of tons?

    The three types are all a measure of mass(weight) the short ton aka US ton
    is 2,000/lbs. the long ton aka British ton is 2240 lbs. the third ton is
    the metric ton which is, equal to 1000 kilograms, or approximately 2204
    pounds.

    What is a short ton vs ton?

    United States. In the United States, a short ton is usually known simply as
    a "ton", without distinguishing it from the tonne (1,000 kilograms or 2,204.62262 pounds), known there as the "metric ton", or the long ton also known as the "imperial ton" (2,240 pounds or 1,016.0469088 kilograms).

    Why is it called a short ton?

    In the U.S. there are 100 pounds in the hundredweight, and in Britain there
    are 112 pounds in the hundredweight. This causes the actual weight of the
    ton to differ between countries. To distinguish between the two tons, the smaller U.S. ton is called short, while the larger British ton is called
    long.

    What is the meaning of hundredweight?

    A hundredweight (abbreviated as CWT) is a standard unit of weight or mass
    used in certain commodities markets. It also may be used to price smaller shipments of goods. In North America, a hundredweight is equal to 100
    pounds; in the United Kingdom, a hundredweight is 112 pounds.

    Why is it called a hundredweight?

    In England in around 1300, different "hundreds" (centum in Medieval Latin)
    were defined. The Weights and Measures Act 1835 formally established the present imperial hundredweight of 112 lb. The United States and Canada came
    to use the term "hundredweight" to refer to a unit of 100 lb.

    What is the difference between a long and short ton?

    ton, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system equal to 2,000 pounds (907.18
    kg) in the United States (the short ton) and 2,240 pounds (1,016.05 kg) in Britain (the long ton). The metric ton used in most other countries is
    1,000 kg, equivalent to 2,204.6 pounds avoirdupois.

    What is the British ton?

    "The ton" was Britain's high society during the late Regency and the reign
    of George IV, and later. The word means, in this context, "manners" or
    "style" and is pronounced as in French.



    --
    MRM

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to '''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk on Sun May 8 07:27:14 2022
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 09:48:01 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a >>>>> largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for.

    But we pay 10% less!


    An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider.

    The Glider was carrying 45% of its required fuel, not 90%.



    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeroen Belleman@21:1/5 to Mike Monett on Sun May 8 16:44:33 2022
    On 2022-05-08 13:05, Mike Monett wrote:
    Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    [...]

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    Some background courtesy google:

    What are the different types of tons?

    The three types are all a measure of mass(weight) the short ton aka US ton
    is 2,000/lbs. the long ton aka British ton is 2240 lbs. the third ton is
    the metric ton which is, equal to 1000 kilograms, or approximately 2204 pounds.

    What is a short ton vs ton?

    United States. In the United States, a short ton is usually known simply as
    a "ton", without distinguishing it from the tonne (1,000 kilograms or 2,204.62262 pounds), known there as the "metric ton", or the long ton also known as the "imperial ton" (2,240 pounds or 1,016.0469088 kilograms).

    Why is it called a short ton?

    In the U.S. there are 100 pounds in the hundredweight, and in Britain there are 112 pounds in the hundredweight. This causes the actual weight of the
    ton to differ between countries. To distinguish between the two tons, the smaller U.S. ton is called short, while the larger British ton is called long.

    What is the meaning of hundredweight?

    A hundredweight (abbreviated as CWT) is a standard unit of weight or mass used in certain commodities markets. It also may be used to price smaller shipments of goods. In North America, a hundredweight is equal to 100
    pounds; in the United Kingdom, a hundredweight is 112 pounds.

    Why is it called a hundredweight?

    In England in around 1300, different "hundreds" (centum in Medieval Latin) were defined. The Weights and Measures Act 1835 formally established the present imperial hundredweight of 112 lb. The United States and Canada came to use the term "hundredweight" to refer to a unit of 100 lb.

    What is the difference between a long and short ton?

    ton, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system equal to 2,000 pounds (907.18 kg) in the United States (the short ton) and 2,240 pounds (1,016.05 kg) in Britain (the long ton). The metric ton used in most other countries is
    1,000 kg, equivalent to 2,204.6 pounds avoirdupois.

    What is the British ton?

    "The ton" was Britain's high society during the late Regency and the reign
    of George IV, and later. The word means, in this context, "manners" or "style" and is pronounced as in French.

    That's an excellent argument in favour of metrication.

    Jeroen Belleman

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun May 8 11:06:58 2022
    On 05/08/2022 08:27 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 09:48:01 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with lining a >>>>>> largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for.

    But we pay 10% less!

    In an era where a 5lb sack of sugar becomes 4lbs in hopes nobody
    notices, I really don't think a short ton was meant to defraud. Before
    Canada went metric everyone (except the completely clueless) knew what
    you were getting on either side of the border when you bought a gallon
    of gasoline.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to rbowman on Sun May 8 10:45:27 2022
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with
    lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider.


    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure
    out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon
    and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained
    the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise
    me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a >simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would
    be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is >expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?



    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to Martin Brown on Sun May 8 10:37:17 2022
    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with
    lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider.


    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112
    pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the
    loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure
    out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon
    and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained
    the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise
    me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a
    simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would
    be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is
    expected, but still...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to Jeroen Belleman on Sun May 8 11:01:22 2022
    On 05/08/2022 08:44 AM, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
    On 2022-05-08 13:05, Mike Monett wrote:
    Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

    [...]

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    Some background courtesy google:

    What are the different types of tons?

    The three types are all a measure of mass(weight) the short ton aka US
    ton
    is 2,000/lbs. the long ton aka British ton is 2240 lbs. the third ton is
    the metric ton which is, equal to 1000 kilograms, or approximately 2204
    pounds.

    What is a short ton vs ton?

    United States. In the United States, a short ton is usually known
    simply as
    a "ton", without distinguishing it from the tonne (1,000 kilograms or
    2,204.62262 pounds), known there as the "metric ton", or the long ton
    also
    known as the "imperial ton" (2,240 pounds or 1,016.0469088 kilograms).

    Why is it called a short ton?

    In the U.S. there are 100 pounds in the hundredweight, and in Britain
    there
    are 112 pounds in the hundredweight. This causes the actual weight of the
    ton to differ between countries. To distinguish between the two tons, the
    smaller U.S. ton is called short, while the larger British ton is called
    long.

    What is the meaning of hundredweight?

    A hundredweight (abbreviated as CWT) is a standard unit of weight or mass
    used in certain commodities markets. It also may be used to price smaller
    shipments of goods. In North America, a hundredweight is equal to 100
    pounds; in the United Kingdom, a hundredweight is 112 pounds.

    Why is it called a hundredweight?

    In England in around 1300, different "hundreds" (centum in Medieval
    Latin)
    were defined. The Weights and Measures Act 1835 formally established the
    present imperial hundredweight of 112 lb. The United States and Canada
    came
    to use the term "hundredweight" to refer to a unit of 100 lb.

    What is the difference between a long and short ton?

    ton, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system equal to 2,000 pounds
    (907.18
    kg) in the United States (the short ton) and 2,240 pounds (1,016.05
    kg) in
    Britain (the long ton). The metric ton used in most other countries is
    1,000 kg, equivalent to 2,204.6 pounds avoirdupois.

    What is the British ton?

    "The ton" was Britain's high society during the late Regency and the
    reign
    of George IV, and later. The word means, in this context, "manners" or
    "style" and is pronounced as in French.

    That's an excellent argument in favour of metrication.

    Jeroen Belleman


    I'll drink to that... I have two US vehicles, a F150 pickup and a
    Harley bike. Both are mostly SAE (inch) fasteners, except when they
    aren't so I need wrenches in both sizes. I believe newer vehicles are
    all metric. With the Toyota and two Suzuki bikes I know they'll be
    metric. Thankfully I haven't had to deal with Whitworth in decades.

    The US has been talking about metrication for decades but the
    legislation has only been a suggestion not a mandate. The only
    wholehearted adopters were the liquor bottlers. A 'fifth' (of a gallon)
    was a customary size and was 757ml. Seems trivial to go to 750ml but
    those milliliters add up.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun May 8 15:09:08 2022
    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with
    lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider. >>>

    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112
    pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the
    loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure
    out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon
    and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained
    the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise
    me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a
    simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would
    be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is
    expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work
    on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to rbowman on Sun May 8 14:35:10 2022
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves >>>>>>>> lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to >>>>>>>> steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license
    105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British >>>> ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider. >>>>

    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >>> pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >>> loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure
    out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon >>> and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained
    the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise
    me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a
    simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would
    be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is
    expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work
    on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He >contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    What I remembered was fabulous bbq ribs on some floating restaurant on
    Lake Champlain. Ribs? In Vermont?



    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun May 8 18:49:36 2022
    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license >>>>>> 105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British >>>>> ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider. >>>>>

    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >>>> pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >>>> loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure >>>> out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon >>>> and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained >>>> the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise >>>> me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a >>>> simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would >>>> be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is
    expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work
    on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He
    contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    My favourite technique for that sort of thing is the Helmholtz
    resonance, which (to leading order) depends only on the air volume in
    the tank, and not on its shape.

    What I remembered was fabulous bbq ribs on some floating restaurant on
    Lake Champlain. Ribs? In Vermont?

    They have to compensate for the weather somehow. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com@21:1/5 to pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical. on Sun May 8 16:31:31 2022
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 18:49:36 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>
    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license >>>>>>> 105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to >>>>>> defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British >>>>>> ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes. >>>>>>
    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider. >>>>>>

    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >>>>> pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange >>>>> unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a >>>>> bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >>>>> loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure >>>>> out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon >>>>> and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained >>>>> the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise >>>>> me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a >>>>> simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would >>>>> be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is >>>>> expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work >>> on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He >>> contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    My favourite technique for that sort of thing is the Helmholtz
    resonance, which (to leading order) depends only on the air volume in
    the tank, and not on its shape.

    We had two capacitive level probes and two inclinometers.


    What I remembered was fabulous bbq ribs on some floating restaurant on
    Lake Champlain. Ribs? In Vermont?

    They have to compensate for the weather somehow. ;)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs


    --

    Anybody can count to one.

    - Robert Widlar

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun May 8 19:18:17 2022
    On 05/08/2022 03:35 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway. >>>>>>>>
    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license >>>>>> 105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to
    defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British >>>>> ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes.

    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider. >>>>>

    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >>>> pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange
    unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a
    bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >>>> loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure >>>> out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon >>>> and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained >>>> the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise >>>> me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a >>>> simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would >>>> be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is
    expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work
    on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He
    contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    Excellent decision! That was the longest winter of my life and since I
    grew up down around Troy NY, that's saying something.

    What I remembered was fabulous bbq ribs on some floating restaurant on
    Lake Champlain. Ribs? In Vermont?


    Burlington is, um, different. Part of it is NYC escapees like Bernie
    Sanders. UVM leavens the mixture, and IBM had a chip plant at Essex
    Junction that they sold to GlobalFoundries when they went out of the fab business.

    I have to say UVM has a hell of a winter carnival. They should; they
    have enough raw material to build a full size snow sculpture of the
    World Trade Center.

    I really can't judge how it is to work there under normal conditions.
    The DISCO thing brought clearances to a screeching halt. They weren't
    letting people go but there was little to do. It would have been
    interesting since the test kits were to be programmed in FORTH for extensibility. I did get to go to the FORTH conference in Rochester NY.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com on Sun May 8 19:51:09 2022
    On 05/08/2022 05:31 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 18:49:36 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

    jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>>
    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license >>>>>>>> 105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to >>>>>>> defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or British >>>>>>> ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes. >>>>>>>
    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli glider.


    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight is 112 >>>>>> pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange >>>>>> unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also >>>>>> escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a >>>>>> bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter and the >>>>>> loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to figure >>>>>> out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's gallon >>>>>> and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also retained >>>>>> the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't surprise >>>>>> me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems than a >>>>>> simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would >>>>>> be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is >>>>>> expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work >>>> on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and >>>> learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of >>>> which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol. >>>>
    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He >>>> contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling >>>> over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the >>>> F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    My favourite technique for that sort of thing is the Helmholtz
    resonance, which (to leading order) depends only on the air volume in
    the tank, and not on its shape.

    We had two capacitive level probes and two inclinometers.

    Measuring the fuel is only half the fun. Moving fuel to maintain the CG
    within the envelope is the other half. One person at Simmonds was either
    a hero or a pariah depending. Rather late in the project she pointed out
    that in some configurations of the B-1 you couldn't pump enough fuel to maintain the CG.

    Then you have something like the AH-64. There are a number of auxiliary
    tank configurations both internal and external to worry about and the configuration determines how many Hellfire and/or 70 mm rockets you can
    carry as well as how much 30mm ammo. Missiles, rockets, and ammo may be expended at odd intervals. It gets more complex than bad math on the
    Gimli glider.

    As an aside, many military aircraft can't be flown by an unaided human. Hopefully commercial aircraft aren't as 'advanced'. At least in the
    Gimli generation a good pilot could set it down without engines or instrumentation although I'm curious about the control surface
    actuators. At least the hydraulics must not depend on both engines running.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to rbowman on Sun May 8 22:24:53 2022
    rbowman wrote:
    On 05/08/2022 03:35 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 15:09:08 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

    On 05/08/2022 11:45 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
    On Sun, 8 May 2022 10:37:17 -0600, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>>>
    On 05/08/2022 02:48 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 07/05/2022 17:23, rbowman wrote:
    On 05/07/2022 02:12 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    On 06/05/2022 17:31, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:46:00 +0100, Martin Brown
    <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:


    High end car theft gangs in Belgium did a pretty good job with >>>>>>>>>> lining a
    largish HVG with supermarket grade aluminium foil and if
    memory serves
    lead flashing seals on the opening joints. Good enough Faraday >>>>>>>>>> cage to
    steal high end cars with notional satellite tracking on them >>>>>>>>>> anyway.

    Cute. I assume that HVG is some kind of lorry.

    Its a typo!
    For HGV = heavy goods vehicle 44T tractor trailer combo.
    US = big rig (but yours are max 64T?)

    80,000 pounds, to avoid the ton ambiguity. Some states will license >>>>>>> 105,000 for intrastate traffic.

    It is only really a problem in the US where short tons are used to >>>>>> defraud the buyer of 10% of what they paid for. An Imperial or
    British
    ton and a metric Ton are close enough for most practical purposes. >>>>>>
    US short measure sharp practice gets you problems like the Gimli
    glider.


    A ton is defined as 20 hundredweights but a British hundredweight
    is 112
    pounds for some obscure reason going back to stones, another strange >>>>> unit of measurement. Why there are 8 stones in a hundredweight also
    escapes me. Actually Canada uses short tons.

    They did use the imperial gallon so I always thought I was getting a >>>>> bargain when buying gasoline in Canada. After going to the liter
    and the
    loonie (Canadian dollar) falling to .75 USD, I gave up trying to
    figure
    out how badly I was getting screwed. The US uses the Queen Anne's
    gallon
    and wasn't about to adopt the Imperial system in 1826. We also
    retained
    the Winchester bushel. I can't find a citation but it wouldn't
    surprise
    me if a hundredweight was 100 pounds before 1826 too.

    Anyway the Gimli Glider was the end result of many more problems
    than a
    simple conversion. It wasn't a high point for Air Canada. Boeing
    certainly didn't help. I once worked for a firm that did fuel
    measurement and management systems. We didn't assume the engines would >>>>> be running to keep the system powered up. Admittedly the systems
    primarily went into military aircraft where a little wear and tear is >>>>> expected, but still...



    This is one of my designs, or at least the hardware part is:

    http://www.highlandtechnology.com/DSS/P330DS.shtml

    Fuel volume measurement is tricky with a funny-shaped tank in a
    tiltable vehicle.

    Did you work for Simmonds?




    Yes, briefly. That was my first and last brush with DoD projects. It
    didn't help that it was in the middle of the walker debacle and DISCO
    put everything on hold as far as clearances went. I'd been hired to work >>> on the test kit software but when there's nothing to test...

    The upside was I had plenty of spare time to go down to Middlebury and
    learn how to fly. The FBO was run by an ag pilot whose family had
    originally built the strip for their spraying operation. It was
    interesting to say the least. He had a couple of elderly Larks, one of
    which added pumping up the brakes to the usual final approach protocol.

    I was moonlighting for another employee who had a side project going. He >>> contacted me almost a year later about some tax paperwork. I asked if
    he'd written any code yet. The answer was no, they were still haggling
    over the design document. I can fully understand why projects like the
    F-35 have problems.

    I'd taken a contract at GE Ft. Wayne to develop a copier power supply
    testing system and it was very refreshing to actually make progress.


    I did a tank gauging system for Simmonds, for LNG tanks on a giant
    barge, when I was with someone else. I did later interview with them,
    but I didn't think I'd like Vermont.

    Excellent decision! That was the longest winter of my life and since I
    grew up down around Troy NY, that's saying something.

    What I remembered was fabulous bbq ribs on some floating restaurant on
    Lake Champlain. Ribs? In Vermont?


    Burlington is, um, different. Part of it is NYC escapees like Bernie
    Sanders. UVM leavens the mixture, and IBM had a chip plant at Essex
    Junction that they sold to GlobalFoundries when they went out of the fab business.

    If only. IBM had to _pay_ GF $1.5B to haul their fabs away. :(

    I did a bunch of work with the Fishkill and Burlington folks BITD.


    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs




    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From rbowman@21:1/5 to Phil Hobbs on Sun May 8 23:11:57 2022
    On 05/08/2022 08:24 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
    If only. IBM had to _pay_ GF $1.5B to haul their fabs away. :(

    I didn't get that part of the story. A high school/college friend spent
    his career in Essex Junction and retired prior too the sale. He
    mentioned IBM was out but didn't go into details.

    https://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/news/local/2021/06/21/ibm-globalfoundries-suing-over-east-fishkill-deal/7768785002/

    It sounds like it's getting chewy.


    My cousin worked there in Burlington in the '70s. There was a space
    problem so her group was temporarily located in a former supermarket.
    They would get the random person wandering in looking for pork chops.
    True to the I've Been Moved philosophy she wound up in Tucson. At least
    it doesn't snow there very often if you stay out of the mountains.

    I did a bunch of work with the Fishkill and Burlington folks BITD.

    My friend worked at Fishkill on sort of a work/study program. As might
    be expected RPI had close ties with IBM. Between IBM and the little
    companies they spun off to avoid monopoly scrutiny it helped to offset
    the manufacturing fleeing NYS.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)