[BC] FCC Approves proposed AM MoM Rules

[Thomas G. Osenkowsky]

Unlike sinusoidal methods the FCC employs, with
MoM and matrix inversion, you can specify a
'tower' with a field ratio of zero. Such a 'tower(s)'
is the reradiator. You simply input the distance and
bearing of that 'tower' just as you would with a real
tower in the array. The same for an unused tower(s)
in the pattern. The output will give you a conjugate
complex value, the inverse reactive part of which is
the optimum value to detune the unused tower(s).
You can obtain an output of the pattern showing the
effects of all the structures.

The non-D proof is subject to environmental and
structural influences whereas the modeling is not.

Tom Osenkowsky, CPBE

> I suppose this is a useful evolution of the AM directional path.  However,
> how does it handle variations in ground conductivity and reradiation from
> other nearby objects like cell towers?  The old style method of doing a
> non-d proof to establish a baseline still seems the best way to begin.