Sorry I didn't get it..
Think in three dimension.
I've researched on what makes offset dishes better than pf dishes and come to think and read about it;
Think of someone shinning a torch at a wall at night... There are two ways you can do it..
One; point it directly and perpendicularly to the wall... You'll find a relatively small Perfectly Round area of illumination... If the torch is your satellite, light is your radio signal from the satellite and the wall is your dish pointing directly at the satellite (like a pf dish does). Your dish will gather relatively small amount of radio waves while pointed directly at the sat due to the small rounded area of illumination..
Scenario Two; You are pointing your torch at the wall but now at an angle say 30 degrees to the wall. You'll see the area of illumination on the wall is larger and Oval. (Like an offset dish)... So if the torch is your satellite radiating radio waves as light in this case, placing an oval dish to look at it at an angle will maximize the area of illumination, thus gathering more "light". More collection means better performance.
Of course in real world we cannot make the torch which represents our satellite to look at our dish or "wall" at an angle. What we do is tilt our "wall" or dish to look at the "torch" or satellite at an angle Called the offset angle.
Thus the birth of offset dishes which should perform better than their pf counterparts.
the wall illumination crap you are defending: .
Thank youPerfect explanation!!
My current location is Limuru, Kenya.
I specialize in fringe satellite reception.
Some of the satellites i have tracked of late in Kenya Include:
Measat 3/3a @91.5°E C band on 2.4 meter prime focus,
Thaicom 5 @78.5°E C band on 1.8 meter prime focus
Apstar-7 @76.5°E C band on I.8 meter prime focus
ABS-1 @75.0°E C band on 2.4 meter prime focus
Intelsat 7/10 @68.5°E C/KU band on 2.4 meter prime focus and 90cm offset
Intelsat 17 @66.0°E C/Ku band on 2.4 meter prime focus and 90 cm offset
Intelsat 906 @64.2°E C band on 1.8 meter offset
Intelsat 902 @62.0°E C band on 2.4 meter prime focus
Intelsat 904 @60.0°E C band on 2.4 meter prime focus
NSS-12 @57.0°E C/Ku band on 1.8 meter prime focus and 90cm offset
Yahsat 1A @52.5°E Ku band on 1.5 meter offset
Intelsat 26 @ 50° East C band on 1.8 meter prime focus
Paksat 1R @38.0°E C band on 1.8 Prime focus
Eutelsat 36A/36B @36.0°E Ku band on 90cm offset
Intelsat New Dawn @ 32.9°E Ku band on 90cm offset
BADR 5/6 @26.0°E on 2.4 meter offset
Amos 5 @17.0°E C/Ku band on 1.8 meter prime focus and 90cm offset
Eutelsat 16A @16.0°E Ku band on 90cm offset
Eutelsat 7A @7.0°E Ku band on 90cm offset plus 1.5 meter for fringe satellite recption of Eutelsat 7A Europe B footpring
Astra 4A 4.8°E Ku band 90cm offset
Rascom-QAF1R @2.8°E C/Ku band on 1.8 meter prime focus and 90cm offset
Intelsat 10-02 @1.0°W C band on 1.8 meter prime focus
Eutelsat 5 West A @5.0°W C abnd on 1.8 meter prime focus
Eutelsat-7WA and Nile201 @7.0°W on 1.5 meter offset
SES-4 @22.0°W on 90cm offset
Plus more satellites,
Well put.Tthe only hindrance is that offset and pf do not compare price wiseI've researched on what makes offset dishes better than pf dishes and come to think and read about it;
Think of someone shinning a torch at a wall at night... There are two ways you can do it..
One; point it directly and perpendicularly to the wall... You'll find a relatively small Perfectly Round area of illumination... If the torch is your satellite, light is your radio signal from the satellite and the wall is your dish pointing directly at the satellite (like a pf dish does). Your dish will gather relatively small amount of radio waves while pointed directly at the sat due to the small rounded area of illumination..
Scenario Two; You are pointing your torch at the wall but now at an angle say 30 degrees to the wall. You'll see the area of illumination on the wall is larger and Oval. (Like an offset dish)... So if the torch is your satellite radiating radio waves as light in this case, placing an oval dish to look at it at an angle will maximize the area of illumination, thus gathering more "light". More collection means better performance.
Of course in real world we cannot make the torch which represents our satellite to look at our dish or "wall" at an angle. What we do is tilt our "wall" or dish to look at the "torch" or satellite at an angle Called the offset angle.
Thus the birth of offset dishes which should perform better than their pf counterparts.
Well put.Tthe only hindrance is that offset and pf do not compare price wise
You guys remember, a month ago, I was here requesting a piece of advice when I wanted to go 2.4!
That is after doing a three months google research! and never came to a conclusion! Among the guys I usually salute are the so called US Satellite guys, as these guys have scientific equipments enough to check and balance but they also never came to consensus!
But one thing they both agreed!
That PF of 2.4 will never outperform offset of the same size in KUband.
And Offset dish of that same size will never outperform PF dish in CBand.
This also was indicated by if I'm correct GIDEN, and/or VICWA.
That being said
The other guys! Not sure if Asian forum or what, they had somewhat the above stand
although they said An offset could as well do both, KUand Cband better than PF could do both ku and Cband given precision is taken to point I.e equivalent CBAND LNB GAIN for Offset, should be the same with that Ku lnb gain for Cband, given that other factors too are the same.
2.4 Prime focus what will be its equivalence in Offset dish for Ku purposes?
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Thanks Munyaga , there are several versions of Openbox V8 original and copy.GIDEN tokea....
Actually my friend in addition to your theory the fact that makes offset better perfomers isI've researched on what makes offset dishes better than pf dishes and come to think and read about it;
Think of someone shinning a torch at a wall at night... There are two ways you can do it..
One; point it directly and perpendicularly to the wall... You'll find a relatively small Perfectly Round area of illumination... If the torch is your satellite, light is your radio signal from the satellite and the wall is your dish pointing directly at the satellite (like a pf dish does). Your dish will gather relatively small amount of radio waves while pointed directly at the sat due to the small rounded area of illumination..
Scenario Two; You are pointing your torch at the wall but now at an angle say 30 degrees to the wall. You'll see the area of illumination on the wall is larger and Oval. (Like an offset dish)... So if the torch is your satellite radiating radio waves as light in this case, placing an oval dish to look at it at an angle will maximize the area of illumination, thus gathering more "light". More collection means better performance.
Of course in real world we cannot make the torch which represents our satellite to look at our dish or "wall" at an angle. What we do is tilt our "wall" or dish to look at the "torch" or satellite at an angle Called the offset angle.
Thus the birth of offset dishes which should perform better than their pf counterparts.
Actually my friend in addition to your theory the fact that makes offset better perfomers is
1. They consist of a 1-4 petals for very large offset dishes, thus nil or very low signal leakage due to gaps on petal joints or chances of warping due to incorrect assembly (errors).
2. Placement of feedhorn/the lnbf on offset dishes is placed at an offset angle ie away from middle like in pf, which casts a shadow nearly as large as the signal beam. On offset it doesn't cast a shadow.
Mind you the dish is the one that receives and reflects the signal to the lnb. Its a reflector. How perfect the shape is determines how much of reflected signal is aimed at the lnb. A slightly warped offset or with wrong focal length loses more signal than a pf.
Sent using Satellite dishes, Lnbs,Decoders and other sat gear