GRGR(31): Low Frequency

[Paul Mackin]

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Jeremy Osner wrote:

> Paul Mackin wrote:
> 
> > I suspect that a 28 km wave would represent a low enough frequency that
> > the radio waves would not be absorbed too much by the sea water.
> 
> B-but does the submarine then need a 9-mile long antenna? How does that work?
> 
> 
> 
> 
I'm sure not though I'm in total ignorance as to what a submarine radio
antenna is like though I do know that the precise length and
configuration of the antenna becomes more critical as the frequency 
increases. Even with frequencies as low as AM uses, transmissions go for
hundreds of miles without much by way of an antenna. For FM to transmit
any but very short distances the antenna construction may be more
important. Suspect, and again I don't really know, that for submarine
radios just about any old surface of any old length and curvature, say the
vast ocean, will do. 

Some electrical engineer on the p-list will probably tell me I'm full of
it.

			P.