NTIA Report 00-381

Flexible Interoperable Transceiver (FIT) Program 

Test Range II: Radio Propagation Measurements 

at 440, 1360 and 1920 MHz Ft. Hood, Texas

Peter Papazian

Perry Wilson

Michael Cotton

Yeh Lo

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Norman Y. Mineta, Secretary

Gregory L. Rohde, Assistant Secretary

for Communications and Information

October 2000
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 iii 

Disclaimer 

Certain commercial equipment and materials are identified in this report to specify 

adequately the technical aspects of the reported results. In no case does such 

identification imply recommendations or endorsement by the National 

Telecommunications and Information Administration, nor does it imply that the material 

or equipment identified is the best available for this purpose.
iv

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 v 

CONTENTS 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................ vii 

 

LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................ xiii 

LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................... xvi 

ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................1 

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 

2. SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ 2 

3. MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ................................................................................ 3 

4. BASIC TRANSMISSION LOSS ......................................................................... 5 

5. DELAY STATISTICS .......................................................................................... 8 

6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 12 

7. FIGURES ............................................................................................................ 13 

APPENDIX A: ANTENNA CALIBRATIONS .............................................................. 39 

APPENDIX B: EIRP AND ANTENNA GAIN............................................................... 46 
vi

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 vii 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This report describes mobile communication link measurements made at Ft. Hood, 

Coryell County, Texas, in support of the Flexible Interoperable Transceiver (FIT) 

program. Ft. Hood is the second of four locations measured, the other three being 

Edwards Air Force Base, CA (completed), Fort Polk, LA (pending) and Camp Lejeune, 

NC (pending). The goal of the measurement series is to define communication link 

characteristics at different frequencies over a representative cross section of military 

training centers. 

The measurements were made using the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) 

multiple channel impulse response system (see Report, Section 3). The primary figures of 

merit used to characterize wireless communication links are basic transmission loss (LBT) 

and delay statistics. Three frequencies were considered: 440 MHz, 1360 MHz, and 1920 

MHz. 440 MHz is representative of several current ground-to-ground communication 

links (JRTC-IS, PRIME, PLRS). 1360 MHz is proposed for the next generation FIT 

system. 1920 MHz has similar characteristics to the 1710-1850 MHz band, which is also 

under consideration for FIT. By comparing the 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz basic 

transmission loss and delay statistics to those for 440 MHz, the viability of using higher 

frequencies for future military communications and the associated system requirements 

can be assessed. At Ft. Hood a second 1360 MHz receiver channel was added. This 

channel was used to monitor a “low” 1360 MHz receive antenna. The purpose of this 

experiment was to measure the difference in received signal using a hand held “low” 

antenna (ground soldier) versus a vehicle-mounted antenna. As before, all channels are 

measured simultaneously. 

Two transmitter sites and a common receiver vehicle route were selected. At both 

transmit sites the antennas were elevated using a 10-m mast on a Humvee provided by 

TEXCOM. Site 1 was located on Anderson Mountain directly north of Copperas Cove. 

Ground elevation at this site is 360 m. The transmitter elevation including mast was 370 

m. This site had a view of the training range to the ridge-line of the Manning Mountains 

just north of the Manning Mountains Road. In general, Anderson Mountain had good 

views of the range except when obscured by vegetation (cypress trees) or valleys cut by 

streams. Some of these obstructions would presumably not exist for the second transmit 

site at Pidcoke. Pidcoke (Site 2) is located near the intersection of Antelope Road and the 

State Highway, which forms the western boundary of the Military Reservation. The 

elevation at Pidcoke is approximately 275 m. The 10-m Humvee mast was used to place 

the antennas at 285 m elevation. Photographs and maps of the transmitter and receiver 

locations are in the figures from Section 2 of the report. 

Data were collected simultaneously at three frequencies. The major question answered by 

the survey is the effect of frequency translation on radio propagation parameters. To 

quantify propagation impairments caused by frequency translation, the impulse response 

data were analyzed and the following metrics tabulated: 
 viii 

1. Linear curve fit parameters n (path loss exponent) and B (multiplier) are tabulated for 

basic transmission loss (LBT) versus distance for three frequencies. The path loss 

exponent, n, is the critical parameter. For line of sight propagation with loss only due 

to signal spreading (free space loss, LFS), n = 2. In areas with obstructions caused by 

terrain, vegetation, or buildings, n typically varies between 2 and 4 due to diffraction, 

attenuation and multipath interference. Column 1, Tables ES1 and ES2 summarize 

the n and B parameters (see Report, Section 4 for more details). By substituting these 

parameters into the curve fit equation, a best fit approximation of path loss versus 

distance can be calculated for the different frequencies and transmitters. These curves 

are then used in conjunction with the free space loss curve to determine additional 

loss over free space (∆LBT/FS). They are also used to determine signal loss due to 

frequency translation from 440 MHz to higher frequencies (∆LBT/440).

2. The difference between the linear fit estimates and ideal free space values is 

designated ∆LBT/FS. These data indicate the additional loss over the basic free space 

loss. The ∆LBT/FS data range is approximately 15 to 30 dB for Anderson Mountain and 

20 to 40 dB for Pidcoke. This difference is most likely due to the transmitter 

elevations. The Anderson Mountain transmitter was at an elevation of 370 m which is 

about 120 m above the survey area. The Pidcoke transmitter was at an elevation of 

285 m or about 35 m above the survey area. This difference compares to a ∆LBT/FS

range of 10 to 20 dB for the high transmitter at Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB) and 

20 to 40 dB for the low transmitter at EAFB. At EAFB the low transmitter was only 5 

m above the survey area, while the high transmitter was also 120 m above the survey 

area. At Ft. Hood the high unobstructed transmitter (Anderson Mountain) had a larger 

∆LBT/FS than the high transmitter at EAFB and a slightly smaller loss than the 

obstructed low transmitter at EAFB. The received signal from Pidcoke was about 

equal with the received signal from the lower transmitter at EAFB. The additional 

losses versus distance for these higher transmitters at Ft. Hood are most likely due to 

obstructions caused by vegetation and terrain. Tables ES1 and ES2 and Report, 

Section 4 summarize these data for Ft. Hood.

3. The difference between the 1360 and 1920 MHz linear fit estimates and the 440 MHz 

linear fit estimate is designated ∆LBT/440. These numbers can be used to determine the 

extra transmit power, system sensitivity, diversity gain, or BER versus signal to noise 

requirements of the proposed higher frequency systems. The ∆LBT/440 data range over 

approximately 7 to 12 dB for the 1360 MHz van roof data and 11 to 15 dB for the 

1920 MHz data. For this metric there is no noticeable difference between the two 

transmitter sites (see Tables ES1 and ES2 and Report, Section 4). For comparison, the 

∆LBT/440 data for EAFB varies from 5 to 15 dB for the 1360 MHz data and 10 to 20 

dB for the 1920 MHz data. So we see that there is 3 to 5 dB less differential loss due 

to frequency translation at Ft. Hood than at EAFB.

4. An alternative to curve fitting the measured data is to bin the LBT data. This is done 

versus distance, and the mean and standard deviation for each bin are calculated as 

well as the 90% and 99% probability levels (i.e. 99% of the LBT data are less than this 

level). 99% LBT levels range from 98 to 167 dB for Anderson Mountain and from 105 
 ix

to 167 dB for Pidcoke. The larger values were limited by the dynamic range of the 

measurement system. The maximum range before this limit was reached using the 

1360 MHz high receiver was about 15 km for Anderson Mountain and about 10 km 

for Pidcoke. These data give the upper bounds for the measured transmission loss LBT

and indicate maximum signal loss on the link required to ensure a certain channel 

availability probability (see Tables ES3 and ES4 and Report, Section 4). The 

difference between the mean and the 99% level can also be added to the curve fit to 

extend the curve fit requirements to the 99% availability level. 99% LBT levels ranged 

from 126 to 163 dB in Cell 1 (low transmitter) at EAFB and from 117 to 157 dB in 

Cell 2 (high transmitter) at EAFB.

5. Delay statistics are necessary for design of a digital system. They are used to 

determine equalizer requirements for elimination of inter-symbol interference. In 

general, delay increases with frequency and with the presence of scattering objects 

(low transmitter). Two figures of merit are the delay spread and the maximum delay. 

Tables ES5 through ES8 summarize the delay statistics for different probability 

levels. In these tables the maximum mean and delay spread are given versus 

frequency. For instance, at 90% probability, the maximum delay is 0.93 μs for both 

Anderson Mountain and Pidcoke at 440 MHz. At 1920 MHz and 90% probability, the 

maximum delay ranges between 1.18 μs at Pidcoke down to 0.65 μs at Anderson 

Mountain. These data are based on average power delay profiles (APDPs) with a 20 

dB interval of discrimination (ID). A 20 dB ID means that the impulse peak to noise 

is > 23 dB and only echoes within 20 dB of the peak are included in the statistics, see 

Report, Section 5 for more details). For comparison, the delay spreads at EAFB are 

up to 2.2 μs for 440 MHz and up to 4.1 μs for 1920 MHz. We see a decrease in 

multipath at Ft. Hood versus EAFB that probably is due to the lack of large metal 

hangers and multistory office buildings in the training area at Ft. Hood. The few 

buildings seen while driving the range at Ft. Hood were a small mock village which 

appeared to consist only of wooden buildings.

6. Simultaneous impulse response measurements at 1360 MHz were made using two 

receive antennas placed at different heights. This experiment was designed to 

measure possible signal degradation between higher vehicle-mounted antennas and 

lower antennas carried by foot soldiers. The low antenna was approximately 0.5 m 

above the ground and towed behind the recording vehicle. The high antenna was 2.5 

m above the ground and situated on the van roof. Measurements indicated that the 

low antenna suffered a 2 to 3 dB decrease in average received signal strength. These 

results were determined using curve fitting (see Report, Section 4 and Figures 4.19 

and 4.20). 
 x

Table ES1. Curve Fit Parameters, Free Space Loss and 440 MHz Loss Compared to 

Basic Transmission Loss Collected Using Anderson Mountain Transmitter Site 

LBT Linear Fit Distance (km) 

Parameters 2.0 20 

F 

(MHz) 

n Β 

(km-1) 

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

440 3.3 848 91.3 15.6 N/A 111.3 28.7 N/A 

1360 3.5 1010 101.1 15.8 10.1 121.1 31.3 12.4 

1920 3.1 4107 104.1 16.4 13.7 124.1 27.3 11.4 

Table ES2. Curve Fit Parameters, Free Space Loss and 440 MHz Loss Compared to 

Basic Transmission Loss Collected Using Pidcoke Transmitter Site 

LBT Linear Fit Distance (km) 

Parameters 1.0 10.0 

F 

(MHz) 

n Β 

(km-1) 

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

440 3.4 1451 85.3 22.2 N/A 105.3 36.2 N/A 

1360 3.9 854 95.1 19.5 7.1 115.1 38.6 12.2 

1920 3.1 9932 104.1 24.2 14.8 118.1 34.8 11.4 

Table ES3. Anderson Mt. Basic Transmission Loss (LBT): Free Space Loss (LFS) and 

Measured Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels 

LBT (dB): 440 

MHz 

LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (trailer) 

 LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (van)

LBT (dB): 1920 

MHz 

D 

(km) 

LFS 

(dB) 

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% 

0.7 82.8 92.2 96.9 98.8 92.6 106.0 120.7 125.3 92.6 104.3 114.6 119.6 95.6 105.6 110.4 112.6 

1.8 90.3 106.8 113.9 114.1 100.1 117.7 125.8 126.3 100.1 116.2 119.7 120.1 103.1 123.9 127.1 128.4 

2.8 94.2 110.1 120.3 122.1 104.0 121.9 130.0 133.2 104.0 121.1 132.6 138.2 107.0 125.6 137.6 139.1 

3.8 96.9 112.5 126.5 130.3 106.7 128.1 144.9 149.9 106.7 125.2 145.1 152.7 109.7 127.8 144.1 148.9 

4.8 99.0 119.8 125.2 127.1 108.8 135.6 147.5 156.5 108.8 136.4 152.9 160.7 111.8 137.6 146.6 155.8 

5.8 100.6 120.2 131.3 137.2 110.4 135.8 152.0 159.0 110.4 131.5 150.3 155.9 113.4 132.5 149.6 154.2 

6.9 102.0 127.2 142.1 145.0 111.8 141.7 165.7 166.8 111.8 141.9 165.2 166.4 114.8 144.3 161.9 164.3 

7.9 103.2 121.3 129.6 138.1 113.0 136.8 151.7 162.5 113.0 128.8 142.2 161.1 116.0 130.0 141.7 150.7 

8.9 104.3 129.9 140.7 146.3 114.1 145.8 159.7 165.9 114.1 141.7 162.7 166.0 117.1 140.6 156.1 161.3 

9.9 105.2 131.0 135.4 138.5 115.0 145.1 154.7 160.5 115.0 142.8 154.3 162.1 118.0 142.5 149.9 155.0 

10.9 106.1 148.5 156.2 158.2 115.9 161.3 166.6 167.3 115.9 162.6 166.2 166.9 118.9 158.8 165.9 166.9 

12.0 106.9 147.3 159.3 160.7 116.7 160.8 166.7 167.3 116.7 159.5 166.4 167.1 119.7 158.6 166.4 167.1 

13.0 107.6 140.3 149.9 158.0 117.4 157.5 166.3 167.2 117.4 158.0 165.9 166.9 120.4 156.9 165.7 166.7 

14.0 108.2 136.2 144.5 151.1 118.0 151.8 164.5 166.7 118.0 151.7 165.2 166.3 121.0 147.9 159.0 164.1 

15.0 108.8 134.8 157.3 159.3 118.6 154.1 166.6 167.5 118.6 142.7 166.4 167.2 121.6 144.0 166.2 167.1 

16.0 109.4 129.2 145.2 158.6 119.2 141.0 161.5 166.7 119.2 140.0 164.9 166.5 122.2 140.6 160.6 166.5 

17.1 110.0 132.6 151.3 153.9 119.8 154.7 166.0 167.1 119.8 149.6 165.8 166.8 122.7 147.2 165.5 166.7 

18.1 110.5 131.5 144.8 151.4 120.3 149.0 165.8 167.1 120.3 147.7 165.6 166.6 123.3 146.3 163.4 165.9 

19.1 110.9 142.4 150.8 152.8 120.7 160.3 166.7 167.3 120.7 157.6 166.3 167.0 123.7 154.7 166.3 166.9 

20.1 111.4 145.2 158.5 160.2 121.2 159.4 166.7 167.5 121.2 159.9 166.3 167.0 124.2 157.9 166.3 167.0 
 xi

Table ES4. Pidcoke Basic Transmission Loss (LBT): Free Space Loss (LFS) and Measured 

Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels 

LBT (dB): 440 

MHz 

LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (trailer) 

 LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (van)

LBT (dB): 1920 

MHz 

D 

(km) 

LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% 

0.3 75.1 92.2 97.1 105.6 84.9 107.6 113.9 124.9 84.9 108.1 116.7 125.1 87.9 109.2 120.5 126.5 

0.7 81.7 107.4 114.0 119.4 91.5 121.8 127.9 130.0 91.5 111.2 122.0 126.6 94.5 115.1 129.8 134.4 

1.0 85.4 106.3 114.6 116.2 95.2 122.6 127.2 128.7 95.2 114.5 124.4 126.3 98.2 118.2 128.1 130.6 

1.4 87.9 111.4 114.3 115.1 97.7 129.5 134.9 138.8 97.7 116.1 119.6 126.7 100.7 120.9 129.0 136.8 

2.0 91.5 130.3 143.4 150.8 101.3 153.4 166.4 167.4 101.3 148.6 165.4 166.5 104.3 150.4 165.9 166.9 

3.1 95.1 113.7 124.4 128.4 104.9 138.4 144.8 151.2 104.9 128.4 142.7 146.2 107.9 130.6 141.0 146.7 

4.1 97.6 130.2 149.9 155.4 107.4 145.5 158.7 164.6 107.4 143.7 164.0 165.9 110.4 141.8 156.0 161.2 

5.2 99.6 122.4 128.8 135.4 109.4 140.3 155.1 160.3 109.4 133.6 145.2 154.9 112.4 133.6 142.9 154.1 

6.2 101.2 131.8 140.4 143.4 111.0 146.7 157.8 165.2 111.0 144.1 159.9 166.2 114.0 143.0 155.2 163.8 

7.3 102.5 131.4 151.1 155.4 112.3 141.5 165.7 167.2 112.3 139.6 166.0 166.9 115.3 142.4 165.3 166.9 

8.0 103.3 133.7 144.2 146.8 113.1 147.6 164.6 167.1 113.1 147.9 165.5 166.6 116.1 146.0 160.4 166.2 

9.0 104.4 139.6 155.2 157.0 114.2 158.1 166.9 167.7 114.2 158.2 166.2 166.9 117.2 153.8 166.3 167.2 

10.1 105.4 152.5 157.5 158.9 115.2 165.0 167.5 168.1 115.2 164.8 166.6 167.2 118.2 164.1 167.1 167.7 

11.1 106.2 150.8 156.5 158.1 116.0 164.5 167.3 167.9 116.0 164.9 166.5 167.1 119.0 162.7 166.9 167.7 

12.1 107.0 140.9 148.1 151.3 116.8 159.8 166.4 167.5 116.8 157.4 166.0 166.9 119.8 150.3 165.0 167.2 

13.2 107.7 146.5 156.8 158.8 117.5 159.2 167.2 168.2 117.5 161.4 166.5 167.1 120.5 157.0 166.7 167.5 

13.9 108.2 142.9 151.4 156.3 118.0 157.4 166.0 167.5 118.0 160.8 165.8 167.0 121.0 154.0 164.5 166.7 

Table ES5. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 69 % APDPs Valid 52 % APDPs Valid 52 % APDPs Valid 61 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.93 0.15 0.15 0.75 0.15 0.13 0.55 0.13 0.08 0.65 0.13 0.09 

99.0 17.4 1.52 3.92 12.1 1.26 2.59 14.7 1.57 3.48 12.0 1.78 3.35 

99.9 23.1 17.8 7.03 39.3 22.1 9.21 20.8 17.4 6.06 24.3 18.4 8.30 

Table ES6. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 10 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 81 % APDPs Valid 69 % APDPs Valid 67 % APDPs Valid 74 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.13 0.09 0.03 0.23 0.11 0.06 0.15 0.09 0.03 0.15 0.09 0.04 

99.0 1.65 0.30 0.46 9.43 3.25 3.03 2.33 0.72 0.74 7.15 3.71 3.08 

99.9 7.13 1.84 2.30 23.7 10.5 8.59 10.9 7.02 3.55 23.7 8.69 9.15 
 xii

Table ES7. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 60 % APDPs Valid 43 % APDPs Valid 42 % APDPs Valid 56 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.93 0.16 0.14 0.75 0.16 0.12 0.56 0.14 0.09 1.18 0.18 0.19 

99.0 9.70 1.14 2.26 10.2 1.94 2.59 3.48 0.40 0.77 7.25 0.93 1.67 

99.9 17.5 3.89 5.40 19.0 3.21 5.39 18.9 1.32 3.78 10.9 2.56 2.77 

Table ES8. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPS with a 10 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 76 % APDPs Valid 60 % APDPs Valid 59 % APDPs Valid 69 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.13 0.09 0.03 0.30 0.13 0.07 0.18 0.10 0.04 0.18 0.10 0.04 

99.0 2.10 0.75 0.88 5.88 2.73 2.21 2.18 0.64 0.72 3.48 0.88 1.17 

99.9 9.73 2.93 3.69 14.5 5.49 4.97 7.58 1.96 2.59 13.5 5.52 4.69 
 xiii 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Page 

Figure 2.1. Anderson Mountain transmitter site showing mast and antenna mount....13 

Figure 2.2. View looking north from Anderson Mountain................................14 

Figure 2.3. Van with trailer at Pidcoke transmitter site....................................15 

Figure 2.4. Measurement crew at Pidcoke transmitter site................................15 

Figure 2.5. Anderson Mountain transmitter site and drive route, Ft. Hood, Texas....16 

Figure 2.6. Pidcoke transmitter site and drive route, Ft. Hood, Texas...................16 

Figure 4.1. Basic transmission loss scatterplot, Anderson Mountain transmitter site.17 

Figure 4.2. Basic transmission loss scatterplot, Pidcoke transmitter site................18 

Figure 4.3. Basic transmission loss variance, Anderson Mt., 440 MHz.................19 

Figure 4.4. Basic transmission loss variance (trailer), Anderson Mt. 1360 MHz.......19 

Figure 4.5. Basic transmission loss variance (van), Anderson Mt., 1360 MHz.........20 

Figure 4.6. Basic transmission loss variance, Anderson Mt., 1920 MHz...............20 

Figure 4.7. Basic transmission loss variance, Pidcoke, 440 MHz........................21 

Figure 4.8. Basic transmission loss variance (trailer), Pidcoke, 1360 MHz............21 

Figure 4.9. Basic transmission loss variance (van), Pidcoke, 1360 MHz...............22 

Figure 4.10. Basic transmission loss variance Pidcoke, 1920 MHz.......................22 

Figure 4.11. Basic transmission loss map, 440 MHz, Anderson Mountain...............23 

Figure 4.12. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Anderson 

Mountain...........................................................................23 

Figure 4.13. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Anderson 

Mountain...........................................................................24 

Figure 4.14. Basic transmission loss map, 1920 MHz, Anderson Mountain.............24 
 xiv

 Page 

Figure 4.15. Basic transmission loss map, 440 MHz, Pidcoke..................... .........25 

Figure 4.16. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Pidcoke..........25 

Figure 4.17. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Pidcoke..........26 

Figure 4.18. Basic transmission loss map, 1920 MHz, Pidcoke...........................26 

Figure 4.19. Basic transmission loss differential for low versus high 1360 MHz 

receive antennas from Anderson Mountain transmitter......................27 

Figure 4.20. Basic transmission loss differential for low versus high 1360 MHz 

receive antennas from Pidcoke transmitter site...............................27 

Figure 5.1. Idealized impulse response diagram with descriptive terminology.........28 

Figure 5.2. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: maximum delay CDF................................29 

Figure 5.3. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: mean delay CDF......................................29 

Figure 5.4. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF.............................30 

Figure 5.5. Pidcoke 20 dB ID: maximum delay CDF......................................30 

Figure 5.6. Pidcoke 20 dB ID: mean delay CDF............................................31 

Figure 5.7. Pidcoke, 20 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF...................................31 

Figure 5.8. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: maximum delay CDF...............................32 

Figure 5.9. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: mean delay CDF....................................32 

Figure 5.10. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF............................33 

Figure 5.11. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: maximum delay CDF......................................33 

Figure 5.12. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: mean delay CDF...........................................34 

Figure 5.13. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: RMS delay delay CDF....................................34 

Figure 5.14. Delay spread (S) map, 440 MHz, Anderson Mountain transmitter site...35 

Figure 5.15. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Anderson Mountain 

transmitter site....................................................................35 
 xv

Page 

Figure 5.16. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Anderson Mountain 

transmitter site.............................................................. ........36 

Figure 5.17. Delay spread (S) map, 1920 MHz, Anderson Mountain transmitter site...36 

Figure 5.18. Delay spread (S) map, 440 MHz, Pidcoke transmitter site...................37 

Figure 5.19. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Pidcoke 

transmitter site.....................................................................37 

Figure 5.20. Delay spread (S) map, 1920 MHz, Pidcoke transmitter site.................38 

Figure A1. Antenna patterns measured at Table Mountain showing gain above 

isotropic versus van azimuth......................................................40 

Figure A2. Gain of 440 MHz Cushcraft transmitter dipole (NIST Chamber)..........41 

Figure A3. 1360 MHz Larson receiving monopole pattern (NIST Chamber)..........42 

Figure A4. Gain of 440 MHz Cushcraft transmitter dipole (NIST Chamber).......... 43 

Figure A5. 1920 MHz Andrew receiving monopole (NIST Chamber)...................... 45 
 xvi

LIST OF TABLES 

 

 Page 

Table 1. ATB Data Acquisition and RF Parameters........................................4 

Table 2. Overview of the Transmit and Receive Antenna Characteristics..............5 

Table 3. Basic Transmission Loss, LBT, Data for Anderson Mountain (Site 1) ........7 

Table 4. Basic Transmission Loss, LBT, Data for Pidcoke Transmitter (Site 2).........7 

Table 5. Anderson Mt. Basic Transmission Loss (LBT), Free Space Loss (LFS) and 

Measured Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels.........................8 

Table 6. Pidcoke Basic Transmission Loss (LBT), Free Space Loss (LFS) and 

Measured Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels........................8 

Table 7. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID .................10

Table 8. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 10 dB ID ................11 

Table 9. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID ........................11 

 

Table 10. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 10 dB ID.........................11 

Table A1. Source Antenna Gain Data used for the Far-Field Tests.......................... 39 

Table A2. Gain Measurements for the Receiving Antennas..................................... 39 

Table A3. Gain Measurements for the Transmitting Antennas................................. 39 

Table A4. 1360 MHz Dorne & Margolin Gain Measurements versus 

Azimuth Angle.......................................................................................... 40 

Table A5. Averaged Table Mountain Azimuth Gain Measurements........................ 41 

Table A6. Gain Measured in the NIST Anechoic Chamber for the 

Receiving Monopole Antennas................................................................. 44 

Table A7. Receiving Antenna Gain .......................................................................... 45 

Table A8. Transmitting Antenna Gain ...................................................................... 45 

Table B1. EIRP Transmitted at Ft Hood, Texas........................................................ 46 
 xvii

Table B2. Receiving Antenna Gain Summary........................................................... 46 

Table B3. Transmitter Antenna Gain Summary........................................................ 46 

Table B4. Transmitter Site Coordinates (NAD83/WGS84)...................................... 46 

Table B5. 1360 MHz Transmit Antenna Pointing Angle.......................................... 46 
 1 

FLEXIBLE INTEROPERABLE TRANSCEIVER (FIT) PROGRAM 

TEST RANGE II: RADIO PROPAGATION MEASUREMENTS 

AT 440, 1360 AND 1920 MHz, FT. HOOD, TEXAS 

Peter Papazian, Perry Wilson, Michael Cotton and Yeh Lo*

Radiowave propagation measurements at Ft. Hood, Texas are described. These 

measurements were made as part of the Flexible Interoperable Transceiver (FIT) 

Program. The objective of the measurements is to define communication link 

requirements at 440, 1360, and 1920 MHz. Simultaneous wideband measurements at 

three frequencies were made using fixed transmitters and a mobile fitted with a multichannel receiver. The system measured the radio channel impulse response. Data outputs 

include delay spread and basic transmission loss. These parameters are compared at the 

three measurement frequencies to determine additional propagation impairments military 

systems will suffer due to frequency translation from 440 MHz to 1360 MHz and 1920 

MHz. 

Key Words: impulse response; radiowave propagation; Flexible Interoperative 

Transceiver; FIT; delay spread; basic transmission loss. 

1. INTRODUCTION 

This report describes mobile communication link measurements made at Ft. Hood, 

Coryell County, Texas, in support of the Flexible Interoperable Transceiver (FIT) 

Program**. Ft. Hood is the second of four locations measured, the other three being 

Edwards Air Force Base, CA (completed), Fort Polk, LA (pending) and Camp Lejeune, 

NC (pending). The goal of the measurement series is to define communication link 

characteristics at different frequencies over a representative cross section of military 

training centers. 

The primary figures of merit used to characterize wireless communication links are basic 

transmission loss and delay statistics. Basic transmission loss is the signal attenuation 

between the transmitting and receiving antennas due to path length, shadowing, and 

scattering. Basic transmission loss determines the range of the link if the transmit power 

and receiver sensitivity are known. The delay statistics quantify the signal power received 

over the direct, or shortest path (first arriving signal), versus the later multipath signals. 

Delay statistics are important in determining bit error rates and equalizer design. 

 

*

 The authors are with the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences, National Telecommunications and 

Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Boulder, CO 80303. 

** This work was sponsored by U.S. Army STRICOM, 12350 Research Parkway, Orlando, FL 32826. 
 2 

Three frequencies are considered: 440 MHz, 1360 MHz, and 1920 MHz. 440 MHz is 

representative of several current ground to ground communication links (JRTC-IS, 

PRIME, PLRS). 1360 MHz is proposed for the next generation FIT system. 1920 MHz 

has similar characteristics to the 1710-1850 MHz band, which is also under consideration 

for FIT. By comparing the 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz basic transmission loss and delay 

statistics to those for 440 MHz, the viability of using higher frequencies for future 

military communications and the associated system requirements can be assessed. At Ft. 

Hood a second 1360 MHz receiver channel was added. This channel was used to monitor 

a “low” 1360 MHz receive antenna. The purpose of this experiment was to measure the 

difference in received signal using a hand held “low” antenna (ground soldier) versus a 

vehicle-mounted antenna. As before, all channels were measured simultaneously. 

The report is organized as follows. Section 2 gives a brief description of the measurement 

site. Two transmitter locations were selected with one common drive route that covered 

the majority of the training area. Section 3 gives a brief overview of the Institute for 

Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) channel sounding system. The system uses a known 

pseudo-noise source that when received and processed closely approximates an ideal 

impulse signal over a wide bandwidth. Sections 4 and 5 detail the basic transmission loss 

measurements and delay statistics data. The figures are collected in Section 7. 

Appendices are included which detail antenna calibration and the effective isotropic 

radiated power (EIRP) utilized during the tests. 

2. SITE DESCRIPTION 

Ft. Hood is located in a rural area of central Texas north of Killeen, TX. The base is a 

principal U.S. Army training center for armored vehicle and tank crews. Its geography is 

defined by the soft, Cretaceous limestone sediments that create a hilly or hummocky 

terrain. The terrain is further broken up by numerous creek beds that have eroded small 

valleys in the surface rocks. These hills and valleys along with numerous cypress trees 

provide ample cover to hide tanks, as well as obstructions that adversely affect 

communications. 

Two transmitter sites and a common receiver vehicle route were selected. At both 

transmit sites the antennas were elevated using a 10-m mast on a Humvee provided by 

TEXCOM. The mast had a 2 m spreader and the antennas were separated by 

approximately 1 m (see Figure 2.1). Site 1 was located on Anderson Mountain directly 

north of Copperas Cove. See Figure 2.2 for a view as seen from the transmitter. Ground 

elevation at this site is 360 m. The transmitting antenna elevation including mast was 370 

m. GPS coordinates of the transmitter sites are listed in Appendix B. This site had a view 

of the training range to the ridge-line of the Manning Mountains just north of the 

Manning Mountains Road. Part of the drive route traverses the north side of the Manning 

Mountains near the Browns Creek Tank Range and on the West Range Road. In this area, 

the transmitted signal was obscured by terrain. This area was normally covered by the 

Owl Creek transmit site which was not used in this survey. In general, Anderson 

Mountain had good views of the range except when obscured by vegetation (cypress 
 3 

trees) or valleys cut by streams. Some of these obstructions would presumably not exist 

for the second transmit site at Pidcoke. Pidcoke (Site 2) is located near the intersection of 

Antelope Road and the State Highway that forms the western boundary of the Military 

Reservation. The elevation at Pidcoke is approximately 275 m. The 10 m Humvee mast 

was used to place the antennas at 285 m elevation. Coverage from Pidcoke was also 

blocked to the NE by the Manning Mountains. Figure 2.3 shows the measurement van at 

Pidcoke with the trailer used for the low 1360 MHz antenna. Figure 2.4 gives another 

view at Pidcoke with the measurement crew. Maps showing the transmitter locations, 

drive routes and data file numbers are shown in Figures 2.5 and 2.6. 

3. MEASUREMENT SYSTEM 

The Institute for Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) antenna test bed (ATB) system used 

for these measurements is designed for measuring the radio channel impulse response. It 

can measure radio propagation parameters at multiple frequencies or from multiple 

antenna elements. It is used for the comparative testing of diversity schemes, adaptive 

antenna systems, and data processing algorithms. The key elements of the acquisition 

system are: 1) up to 8 simultaneous channels, 2) broadband channel impulse sounding, 3) 

high speed analog to digital data conversion and storage, and 4) flexible post processing. 

The multi-channel ATB sounder uses an upgraded version of the ITS digital channel 

probe (DCP). This probe has been used in previous programs (Motorola, USWEST, and 

PACTEL) to make impulse response measurements in the 900-MHz cellular and 1900-

MHz PCS bands [1-3]. The system transmits a maximal-length pseudo noise (PN) code. 

The PN code is biphase shift key (BPSK) modulated onto an RF carrier. The transmitter 

is both frequency and bit-rate agile and can produce multiple PN codes and transmit 

frequencies simultaneously. The transmitted signal, modified by the radio channel, is 

received, down-converted to an intermediate frequency (IF), and then digitized. The 

impulse response is generated by cross correlating a copy of the transmitted PN code with 

the received signal after it has been converted to base band. 

For the measurements reported here, the probe was configured to transmit a 511 bit PN 

word at 10 Mb/s on 440 MHz, 1360 MHz, and 1920 MHz carriers. The theoretical 

impulse signal to correlation noise ratio is 54 dB for a 511-bit PN sequence. The 

processing gain of the system is 27 dB. This means that when the signal power equals the 

noise power, the peak of the impulse response will be 27 dB above the noise. These 

parameters allow detection of multipath delays as great as 51 μs and resolution of 

multiple delays spaced as closely as 100 ns. Since the system measures the propagation 

time, the first arrival for signals traveling more than 16 km must be shifted in software so 

delayed signals will not wrap and appear to arrive first. This is easily done using the GPS 

coordinates and adding time offsets to the data at large transmitter-receiver separations. 

System timing is maintained using rubidium oscillators at the transmitter and receiver. 

These clocks synchronize the PN code generators, phase lock all local oscillators and 

provide sampling clocks for the digitizers. The oscillators’ frequency stability ensures 

absolute timing measurements to within 50 ns for an 8-hour measurement period. It also 

allows measurement of the Doppler spectrum with 1 Hz accuracy. Data acquisition is 
 4 

controlled by multiple digital signal processors (DSPs) and a host computer system. 

Acquisition was set to the burst mode for these tests. In this mode, a burst of data is 

collected in rapid sequence and stamped with GPS coordinates and time. The next data 

burst is acquired after a programmable delay that was set to 10 seconds for these 

measurements. Within a burst, the delay between impulses (51 μs in length) was set to 3 

ms. The number of impulses per burst was set to 128. This resulted in an overall burst 

duration of approximately 388 ms. Table 1 summarizes the data acquisition parameters 

used for the diversity measurements, as well as the range of permissible values for the 

ATB system. Block diagrams for the system can be found in [4]. 

Mobile receiving antennas (RX) and fixed transmitting antennas (TX) were used. The 

transmitting antennas were mounted on a 10-m mast as described in Section 2. These 

antennas were omni-directional dipoles except for the 1360 MHz antenna. This antenna 

had an azimuthal pattern. A directional antenna pattern was utilized during the data 

processing by calculating the azimuth angle between the transmitter and receiver vehicle 

based on their GPS coordinates. The mobile receivers all used omni-directional monopole 

antennas. Three receiving antennas (440, 1360 and 1920 MHz) were mounted at a height 

of 2.4 m on the roof of a van equipped with a GPS/dead reckoning system. The fourth 

receive antenna was mounted on a trailer at an elevation of 0.5 m and towed behind the 

van. Receive antenna patterns and gains were measured in situ on the van and in an 

anechoic chamber using a 1.3 m diameter ground plane. An overview of the antenna 

characteristics is given in Table 2 (H = horizontal, V = vertical). For more detail on 

antenna calibrations see Appendix A. 

The in-situ vertical plane antenna gain measurements were made in several locations in 

the far field using a clear line of sight. The measured data agree with manufacturer's 

specifications only for the 1360 and 1920 MHz transmitter antennas. Differences arise 

due to cables, connectors and environment. One important effect is that the van roof only 

approximates an infinite ground screen. This causes the vertical directivity of the receive 

antennas to peak near 20° [5]. Thus, along the horizon (0°) these antennas can have gains 

less than an isotropic radiator, as is the case for the 1360 and 1920 MHz receive antennas. 

To better quantify these effects, gain and directivity measurements were made in an 

anechoic chamber. 

Table 1. ATB Data Acquisition and RF Parameters 

Configurable System Parameters 

Parameter Present Diversity Tests ATB System 

Receiver Channels 3 1-8 

Carrier Frequencies 440, 1360, 1920 MHz .45 – 6 GHz 

Bit Rate 10 Mb/s .1 – 50 Mb/s 

Resolution 100 ns 10 μs – 20 ns 

Code Type Maximal Length Programmable 

Code Length 511 bits Programmable 

Acquisition Mode Burst Continuous or Burst 

Positioning GPS/Dead Reckoning GPS/Dead Reckoning 

Transmitters 3 Multiple 

Data Processing Post Post or Real Time 
 5 

Table 2. Overview of the Transmit and Receive Antenna Characteristics 

 

Frequency 440 MHz 1360 MHz 1920 MHz 

 

TX Antennas 

Type Cushcraft FRX-430 

Dipole 

Dorne and Margolin 

DM Q130 -Dipole 

Andrew PC1N0F019A-006 Dipole 

H-Plane Pattern Omni-directional Directional * Omni-directional 

V-Plane Gain (dBi) 1.7 11.3 6.9 

 

RX Antennas **see note 

Type Larson 5/8λ

monopole 

Larson Base with 

1⁄4λ monopole 

Andrew magmount 

PCS monopole 

H-Plane Pattern Omni-directional Omni-directional Omni-directional 

V-Plane Gain (dBi) 1.2 -1.3 -0.7 

* 160 degree 3-dB beamwidth, azimuth pattern from lookup table. 

** Two 1360 MHz receive monopole antennas were used at the receiver. One was placed 

on the van roof, the second was positioned on a low trailer 0.5 m above the ground. 

4. BASIC TRANSMISSION LOSS 

Basic transmission loss (LBT), is the signal attenuation between transmit and receive 

antennas due to free space, or spreading loss (LFS), and signal attenuation. Basic 

transmission loss determines the range of the communications link. Basic transmission 

loss is given by 

L (dB) P (dB) P (dB) G (dB) G (dB) BT = t − r + t + r (4.1) 

where Pt is the transmitted power, Pr is the received power, Gt is the transmit antenna 

gain, and Gr is the receive antenna gain. An ideal free space (FS) path (no ground 

reflection, no multipath, no signal attenuation) has a path loss which is proportional to the 

square (n = 2) of the separation D

 

2

10

4 ( ) 10 log

=





 



 =

n

FS

D L d n

λ

π (4.2) 

where λ is the wavelength. This typically represents the minimum path loss and serves as 

a lower limit. Path loss exponents n on the order of 4 are more representative of the 

cluttered environments and low transmit antenna heights found at cellular base stations in 

built-up areas and areas obscured by terrain and vegetation. 
 6 

4.1 Path Loss Data and Discussion 

The basic transmission loss (LBT) versus distance is plotted for the three frequencies (440 

MHz, 1360 MHz, and 1920 MHz) and two transmitter locations in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. 

Each point in these scatter plots represents an average over a burst (128 impulses per 

burst, all impulses within a burst have the same GPS location tag). The data are then fit 

with a curve of the form 

10 log ( ) LBT = n 10 BD , (4.3) 

 where B = distance multiplier 

D= Distance in km. 

This curve is linear with a slope of n when plotted on a log scale. Free space path loss 

(LFS) is also plotted for the same three frequencies. The free-space curves serve as a 

“minimum” loss reference. 

One loss parameter of interest is the ratio of the measured basic transmission loss to the 

free space loss at a given frequency, designated ∆ LBT/FS. This parameter gives an 

indication of the additional loss due to scattering and diffraction within the channel. Also 

of interest is the ratio of the measured loss at 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz to the measured 

loss at 440 MHz, designated ∆ LBT/440. This parameter gives an indication of the 

additional power needed at these higher frequencies when compared to the existing 440 

MHz systems. These two parameters are highlighted in the discussion that follows and in 

Tables 3 to 6. 

Figure 4.1 shows the LBT data measured using the Anderson Mountain transmitter site. 

From the curve fit data we see that the path loss exponents, n, for the 440, 1360 and 1920 

MHz frequencies are 3.3, 3.5 and 3.1 respectively. The 1360 MHz path loss exponent is 

from the van roof mounted antenna. LBT is larger than the free space values at all 

distances, and this difference increases as distance increases. For example, at 2.0 km, the 

440 MHz, 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz LBT/FS values are 15.6 dB, 15.8 dB and 16.4 dB 

respectively. This means that the path loss at these frequencies and distance is about 16 

dB larger than predicted from the free space loss equation. At 20 km, LBT/FS is 28.7 dB, 

31.3 dB and 27.3 dB respectively. The loss ratio for 1360 and 1920 MHz to the loss at 

440 MHz (∆ LBT/440) is 10.1 dB and 13.7 dB at 2 km and 12.4 dB and 11.4 dB at 20 km 

respectively. This means that the best-fit ratio of measured loss at higher frequencies is 

10 to 12 dB greater than the loss measured at 440 MHz using the Anderson Mountain 

transmitter site. These data are summarized in Table 3. 

The path loss exponents for Pidcoke are 3.4, 3.9 and 3.1 for the 440, 1360 and 1920 MHz 

carrier frequencies. These data have only a slight increase in path loss exponents when 

compared to the Anderson Mountain site. However, the loss differential over free space 

increased using the lower transmitter at Pidcoke. At 1.0 km, LBT/FS values for 440 MHz, 

1360 MHz and 1920 MHz are 22.2 dB, 19.5 dB and 24.2, all larger than the 

corresponding LBT/FS at 2.0 km for the Anderson Mountain site. At 10.0 km, LBT/FS values 
 7 

for 440 MHz, 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz are 36.2 dB, 38.6 dB and 34.8, again all 

substantially larger than the corresponding LBT/FS values at 20.0 km for the Anderson 

Mountain site. However, the ratio of loss at 1360 and 1920 MHz to the loss at 440 MHz 

(∆ LBT/440) for Pidcoke is 7.1 and 14.8 dB at 1 km and 12.2 and 11.4 dB at 10 km. So 

moving to higher frequencies has a similar penalty for both transmitter sites. These values 

can be linearly interpolated for other distances in the measured range by multiplying the 

ratio of the distances in km by the slope. These data for Pidcoke are summarized in Table 

4. 

Table 3. Basic Transmission Loss, LBT, Data for Anderson Mountain (Site 1) 

LBT Linear Fit Distance (km) 

Parameters 2.0 20 

F 

(MHz) 

n Β 

(km-1) 

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

440 3.3 848 91.3 15.6 N/A 111.3 28.7 N/A 

1360 3.5 1010 101.1 15.8 10.1 121.1 31.3 12.4 

1920 3.1 4107 104.1 16.4 13.7 124.1 27.3 11.4 

Table 4. Basic Transmission Loss, LBT, Data For Pidcoke Transmitter (Site 2) 

LBT Linear Fit Distance 

Parameters 1.0 (km) 10.0 (km) 

F 

(MHz) 

n Β 

(km-1) 

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

LFS 

(dB) 

∆LBT/FS

(dB)

∆LBT/440

(dB)

440 3.4 1451 85.3 22.2 N/A 105.3 36.2 N/A 

1360 3.9 854 95.1 19.5 7.1 115.1 38.6 12.2 

1920 3.1 9932 104.1 24.2 14.8 118.1 34.8 11.4 

An alternative to curve fitting the measured data is to bin the LBT data according to 

distance and compute the mean, standard deviation, and the 90% and 99% probability 

levels (i.e. 99% of the LBT data in the bin are less than this level). These data give the 

upper bounds for the measured transmission loss, LBT, and indicate transmit power levels 

needed to ensure a certain channel availability probability. The data are plotted in Figures 

4.3 through 4.10 and summarized in Tables 5 and 6. Note that in these plots the data are 

not averaged over a burst as in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. The 99% LBT levels range from 98.8 

to 168 dB for the Anderson Mt. transmitter site and from 105.6 to 168 dB for the Pidcoke 

transmitter site. The 168 dB level represents the noise floor for the present system 

configuration. This limit is not reached for 440 MHz. However, at 1360 MHz and 1920 

MHz, this limit is reached at approximately 11 km for Anderson Mt. and 7 km for 

Pidcoke. 
 8 

Table 5. Anderson Mt. Basic Transmission Loss (LBT), Free Space Loss (LFS) and 

Measured Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels 

LBT (dB): 440 

MHz 

LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (trailer) 

 LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (van)

LBT (dB): 1920 

MHz 

D 

(km) 

LFS 

(dB) 

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% 

0.7 82.8 92.2 96.9 98.8 92.6 106.0 120.7 125.3 92.6 104.3 114.6 119.6 95.6 105.6 110.4 112.6 

1.8 90.3 106.8 113.9 114.1 100.1 117.7 125.8 126.3 100.1 116.2 119.7 120.1 103.1 123.9 127.1 128.4 

2.8 94.2 110.1 120.3 122.1 104.0 121.9 130.0 133.2 104.0 121.1 132.6 138.2 107.0 125.6 137.6 139.1 

3.8 96.9 112.5 126.5 130.3 106.7 128.1 144.9 149.9 106.7 125.2 145.1 152.7 109.7 127.8 144.1 148.9 

4.8 99.0 119.8 125.2 127.1 108.8 135.6 147.5 156.5 108.8 136.4 152.9 160.7 111.8 137.6 146.6 155.8 

5.8 100.6 120.2 131.3 137.2 110.4 135.8 152.0 159.0 110.4 131.5 150.3 155.9 113.4 132.5 149.6 154.2 

6.9 102.0 127.2 142.1 145.0 111.8 141.7 165.7 166.8 111.8 141.9 165.2 166.4 114.8 144.3 161.9 164.3 

7.9 103.2 121.3 129.6 138.1 113.0 136.8 151.7 162.5 113.0 128.8 142.2 161.1 116.0 130.0 141.7 150.7 

8.9 104.3 129.9 140.7 146.3 114.1 145.8 159.7 165.9 114.1 141.7 162.7 166.0 117.1 140.6 156.1 161.3 

9.9 105.2 131.0 135.4 138.5 115.0 145.1 154.7 160.5 115.0 142.8 154.3 162.1 118.0 142.5 149.9 155.0 

10.9 106.1 148.5 156.2 158.2 115.9 161.3 166.6 167.3 115.9 162.6 166.2 166.9 118.9 158.8 165.9 166.9 

12.0 106.9 147.3 159.3 160.7 116.7 160.8 166.7 167.3 116.7 159.5 166.4 167.1 119.7 158.6 166.4 167.1 

13.0 107.6 140.3 149.9 158.0 117.4 157.5 166.3 167.2 117.4 158.0 165.9 166.9 120.4 156.9 165.7 166.7 

14.0 108.2 136.2 144.5 151.1 118.0 151.8 164.5 166.7 118.0 151.7 165.2 166.3 121.0 147.9 159.0 164.1 

15.0 108.8 134.8 157.3 159.3 118.6 154.1 166.6 167.5 118.6 142.7 166.4 167.2 121.6 144.0 166.2 167.1 

16.0 109.4 129.2 145.2 158.6 119.2 141.0 161.5 166.7 119.2 140.0 164.9 166.5 122.2 140.6 160.6 166.5 

17.1 110.0 132.6 151.3 153.9 119.8 154.7 166.0 167.1 119.8 149.6 165.8 166.8 122.7 147.2 165.5 166.7 

18.1 110.5 131.5 144.8 151.4 120.3 149.0 165.8 167.1 120.3 147.7 165.6 166.6 123.3 146.3 163.4 165.9 

19.1 110.9 142.4 150.8 152.8 120.7 160.3 166.7 167.3 120.7 157.6 166.3 167.0 123.7 154.7 166.3 166.9 

20.1 111.4 145.2 158.5 160.2 121.2 159.4 166.7 167.5 121.2 159.9 166.3 167.0 124.2 157.9 166.3 167.0 

Table 6. Pidcoke Basic Transmission Loss (LBT), Free Space Loss (LFS) and Measured 

Mean (Avg), 90%, and 99% Probability Levels 

LBT (dB): 440 

MHz 

LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (trailer) 

 LBT (dB): 1360 

MHz (van)

LBT (dB): 1920 

MHz 

D 

(km) 

LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% LFS 

(dB)

Avg 90% 99% 

0.3 75.1 92.2 97.1 105.6 84.9 107.6 113.9 124.9 84.9 108.1 116.7 125.1 87.9 109.2 120.5 126.5 

0.7 81.7 107.4 114.0 119.4 91.5 121.8 127.9 130.0 91.5 111.2 122.0 126.6 94.5 115.1 129.8 134.4 

1.0 85.4 106.3 114.6 116.2 95.2 122.6 127.2 128.7 95.2 114.5 124.4 126.3 98.2 118.2 128.1 130.6 

1.4 87.9 111.4 114.3 115.1 97.7 129.5 134.9 138.8 97.7 116.1 119.6 126.7 100.7 120.9 129.0 136.8 

2.0 91.5 130.3 143.4 150.8 101.3 153.4 166.4 167.4 101.3 148.6 165.4 166.5 104.3 150.4 165.9 166.9 

3.1 95.1 113.7 124.4 128.4 104.9 138.4 144.8 151.2 104.9 128.4 142.7 146.2 107.9 130.6 141.0 146.7 

4.1 97.6 130.2 149.9 155.4 107.4 145.5 158.7 164.6 107.4 143.7 164.0 165.9 110.4 141.8 156.0 161.2 

5.2 99.6 122.4 128.8 135.4 109.4 140.3 155.1 160.3 109.4 133.6 145.2 154.9 112.4 133.6 142.9 154.1 

6.2 101.2 131.8 140.4 143.4 111.0 146.7 157.8 165.2 111.0 144.1 159.9 166.2 114.0 143.0 155.2 163.8 

7.3 102.5 131.4 151.1 155.4 112.3 141.5 165.7 167.2 112.3 139.6 166.0 166.9 115.3 142.4 165.3 166.9 

8.0 103.3 133.7 144.2 146.8 113.1 147.6 164.6 167.1 113.1 147.9 165.5 166.6 116.1 146.0 160.4 166.2 

9.0 104.4 139.6 155.2 157.0 114.2 158.1 166.9 167.7 114.2 158.2 166.2 166.9 117.2 153.8 166.3 167.2 

10.1 105.4 152.5 157.5 158.9 115.2 165.0 167.5 168.1 115.2 164.8 166.6 167.2 118.2 164.1 167.1 167.7 

11.1 106.2 150.8 156.5 158.1 116.0 164.5 167.3 167.9 116.0 164.9 166.5 167.1 119.0 162.7 166.9 167.7 

12.1 107.0 140.9 148.1 151.3 116.8 159.8 166.4 167.5 116.8 157.4 166.0 166.9 119.8 150.3 165.0 167.2 

13.2 107.7 146.5 156.8 158.8 117.5 159.2 167.2 168.2 117.5 161.4 166.5 167.1 120.5 157.0 166.7 167.5 

13.9 108.2 142.9 151.4 156.3 118.0 157.4 166.0 167.5 118.0 160.8 165.8 167.0 121.0 154.0 164.5 166.7 

The LBT data can also be plotted on maps as in Figures 4.11 through 4.18. These maps 

show the spatial distribution of LBT along the various cell-route combinations. They are 

useful for anticipating areas where there will be coverage problems from a given 

transmitter site. 

The effects of receiver antenna height were studied by adding an additional 1360 MHz 

channel and placing its antenna on a low trailer behind the measurement van. Data for 

this channel are compared to data from a “high” antenna mounted on the van roof. 

Figures 4.19 and 4.20 are scatterplots of LBT, comparing these two antennas for each 

transmitter site. Using the curve fit data for Anderson Mountain, we see that the low 

antenna has a similar path loss exponent but about 2 to 3 dB more basic transmission 

loss. For Pidcoke the basic transmission loss differential is hard to estimate because the 
 9 

path loss exponents or slopes of the curves were different, causing the curves to intersect 

near 10 km. 

5. DELAY STATISTICS 

The delay statistics presented in this report are based on averaged power delay profiles 

(APDPs) 

∑=

=

N

k

i k i PDP t

N

APDP t

1

( ) 1 ( ) , (5.1) 

where ti is the i-th time step (sampling point), and N is the number of PDPs used to form 

the APDP. The PDP is the magnitude squared (power) of the measured impulse response. 

The use of averaging significantly reduces the contribution of noise to the delay statistics. 

The ATB burst configuration software was set to produce 128 impulses per burst for 

these measurements. APDPs were calculated from groups of 8 successive PDPs. Thus, 

each burst yields 16 APDPs (128/8). The choice of 8 as the group size makes efficient 

use of all the burst data. APDPs were computed separately for each channel. 

Impulses within an APDP group (8 successive PDPs) were first checked for sufficient 

power. The impulse with the maximum total signal power was found by integration over 

the full time interval. Impulses with total signal power more than 10 dB below this group 

maximum were discarded for the APDP statistics. Groups containing less than 4 usable 

PDP’s are discarded as well. Thus, N ranges from 4 to 8 in (5.1) above. 

Referring to Figure 5.1, the interval of discrimination (ID) is here defined as the 

difference in power levels between the peak of the intended signal (impulse) and the peak 

noise. It is desired that an APDP have an ID sufficient to ensure that noise does not 

contaminate the fading statistics. For the data here, 23 dB and 13 dB ID criteria have 

been used. The 23 dB margin gives the maximum useful dynamic range for analog 

applications, while the 13 dB threshold may be more useful for digital applications. If the 

ID is less than 23 dB or 13 dB respectively, then the APDP was discarded for that data 

set. For valid APDPs, signal levels within 20 dB and 10 dB respectively of the APDP 

peak were included in the delay statistics, as indicated in Figure 5.1. This corrected 

APDP ensures that noise is not included. We expect the 20 dB criterion to yield longer 

delays but fewer valid APDPs than will the 10 dB criterion. 

Three delay measures were considered: maximum delay, mean delay, and RMS delay 

spread. The maximum delay was defined as the time delay between the first and last 

signals of that portion of the corrected APDP (see Fig. 5.1). The mean delay (d) was the 

time-weighted average, or first moment, of the corrected APDPs normalized by the 

average signal power, 
 10 

∑

∑

∑

∑

=

=

=

= = = = N

k

k

N

k

k k

N

k

k

N

k

k k

P t

t P t

P t

N

t P t

N

mean delay d

1

1

1

1

( )

( )

( ) 1

( ) 1

 , (5.2) 

where tk is the time delay (in seconds) relative to the start of the corrected APDP (i.e. t = 

0), P is the signal power (W), and N is the index of the final corrected APDP signal point 

considered. The RMS delay spread (S) measures the standard deviation of the delay 

spread of each corrected APDP about its mean delay (d). It is the second central moment 

of the corrected APDP given by 

1/ 2

1

1

2

( )

( ) ( )























 −

= =

∑

∑

=

=

N

k

k

N

k

k k

P t

t d P t

RMS delay spread S . (5.3) 

Figures 5.2 through 5.7 show the cumulative probability distributions (CDFs) for the two 

transmitter sites (Anderson Mt. and Pidcoke) using 23 dB ID and 20 dB corrected APDP 

levels. Figures 5.8 through 5.13 show the corresponding data for the 13 dB ID and 10 dB 

corrected APDP levels. The CDF data are summarized in Tables 7 through 10 which give 

the maximum delay (max), mean delay (avg), and RMS delay spread (spr) in 

microseconds observed at the 90%, 99%, and 99.9% probability levels. Also included in 

the tables are the percentages of valid APDPs for each of the transmitter, ID, and 

frequency combinations. 

Figures 5.14 through 5.21 show the RMS Delay Spread data on site maps. Gaps indicate 

areas where the signal strength was too low to calculate delay spread. Using these maps, 

specific areas with multipath can be identified. In general they show that most areas had 

small delay spreads near the resolution limit of the measurment system, which is between 

20 and 30 ns using a 20 dB ID. 

Table 7. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 69 % APDPs Valid 52 % APDPs Valid 52 % APDPs Valid 61 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max Avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.93 0.15 0.15 0.75 0.15 0.13 0.55 0.13 0.08 0.65 0.13 0.09 

99.0 17.4 1.52 3.92 12.1 1.26 2.59 14.7 1.57 3.48 12.0 1.78 3.35 

99.9 23.1 17.8 7.03 39.3 22.1 9.21 20.8 17.4 6.06 24.3 18.4 8.30 
 11 

Table 8. Anderson Mt.: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 10 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 81 % APDPs Valid 69 % APDPs Valid 67 % APDPs Valid 74 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max Avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.13 0.09 0.03 0.23 0.11 0.06 0.15 0.09 0.03 0.15 0.09 0.04 

99.0 1.65 0.30 0.46 9.43 3.25 3.03 2.33 0.72 0.74 7.15 3.71 3.08 

99.9 7.13 1.84 2.30 23.7 10.5 8.59 10.9 7.02 3.55 23.7 8.69 9.15 

Table 9. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 20 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 60 % APDPs Valid 43 % APDPs Valid 42 % APDPs Valid 56 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.93 0.16 0.14 0.75 0.16 0.12 0.56 0.14 0.09 1.18 0.18 0.19 

99.0 9.70 1.14 2.26 10.2 1.94 2.59 3.48 0.40 0.77 7.25 0.93 1.67 

99.9 17.5 3.89 5.40 19.0 3.21 5.39 18.9 1.32 3.78 10.9 2.56 2.77 

Table 10. Pidcoke: Delay Statistics for APDPs with a 10 dB ID 

 440 MHz 1360 MHz (Trailer) 1360 MHz (Van) 1920 MHz 

 76 % APDPs Valid 60 % APDPs Valid 59 % APDPs Valid 69 % APDPs Valid 

Prob. Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) Delay (μs) 

(%) max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr max avg spr 

90.0 0.13 0.09 0.03 0.30 0.13 0.07 0.18 0.10 0.04 0.18 0.10 0.04 

99.0 2.10 0.75 0.88 5.88 2.73 2.21 2.18 0.64 0.72 3.48 0.88 1.17 

99.9 9.73 2.93 3.69 14.5 5.49 4.97 7.58 1.96 2.59 13.5 5.52 4.69 
 12 

6. REFERENCES 

[1] J. A. Wepman, J. R. Hoffman, L. Loew and V. S. Lawrence, “Comparison of 

wideband propagation in the 902-928 and 1850-1990 MHz bands in various 

macrocellular environments,” NTIA Report 93-299, Sep. 1993. 

[2] J. A. Wepman, J. R. Hoffman and L. Loew, “Impulse response measurements in 

the 1850-1990 MHz band in large outdoor cells”, NTIA Report 94-309, June 

1994. 

[3] P. Wilson, P. Papazian, M. Cotton and Y. Lo, “Advanced antenna test bed 

characterization for wideband wireless communication systems,” NTIA Report 

99-369, August 1999. 

[4] P. Papazian, K. Allen and M. Cotton, “A test bed for the evaluation of adaptive 

antennas used for mobile communications”, in Proc. IEEE Aerospace 

Conference, Snowmass, CO, Mar. 1998, paper #161. 

[5] M. Weiner, S. Cruze, C. Li and W. Wilson, Ch. 3 of Monopole Elements on 

Circular Ground Planes, Norwood, MA: Artech House, 1987, pp. 19-76. 
 13 

7. FIGURES 

Figure 2.1. Anderson Mountain transmitter site showing mast and antenna mount. 
 14 

Figure 2.2. View looking north from Anderson Mountain. 
 15 

Figure 2.3. Van with trailer at Pidcoke transmitter site. 

Figure 2.4. Measurement crew at Pidcoke transmitter site. 
 16 

Figure 2.5. Anderson Mountain transmitter site and drive route, Ft. Hood, Texas. 

Figure 2.6. Pidcoke transmitter site and drive route, Ft. Hood, Texas 
 17 

Figure 4.1 Basic transmission loss scatterplot, Anderson Mountain transmitter site. 

100

150

0.5 1 2 5 10 20

1920 MHz

1360 MHz

440 MHz

1920 LFS Fit

1360 LFS Fit

440 LFS Fit

1920 Fit

1360 Fit

440 Fit

y=a10log(bx) max dev:24.8, r

2

=0.408

a=3.08, b=4107

y=a10log(bx) max dev:27.1, r

2

=0.409

a=3.54, b=1010

y=a10log(bx) max dev:26.4, r

2

=0.480

a=3.31, b=848

Distance(km)

LBT (dB)

Anderson Mtn. Transmitter Site, Ft. Hood, Texas
 18 

Figure 4.2 Basic transmission loss scatterplot, Pidcoke transmitter site. 

100

150

0.1 1 10

1920 LFS 1360 LFS 440 LFS 1920 Fit

1360 Fit

440 Fit

1920 MHz

1360 MHz (roof)

440 MHz

y=a10log(bx) max dev:34.6, r

2

=0.453

a=3.06, b=9932

y=a10log(bx) max dev:30.1, r

2

=0.563

a=3.91, b=854

y=a10log(bx) max dev:26.2, r

2

=0.571

a=3.40, b=1451

Distance(km)

LBT(dB)

Pidcoke Transmitter Site, Ft. Hood Texas.
 19 

100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Anderson Mt: 440 MHz

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.3. Basic transmision loss variance, Anderson Mt., 440 MHz. 

100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Anderson Mt: 1360 MHz (Trailer)

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.4. Basic transmision loss variance (trailer), Anderson Mt., 1360 MHz. 
 20 

100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Anderson Mt: 1360 MHz (Van)

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.5. Basic transmision loss variance (van), Anderson Mt., 1360 MHz. 

100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Anderson Mt: 1920 MHz

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.6. Basic transmision loss variance, Anderson Mt., 1920 MHz. 
 21 

10-1 100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Pidcoke: 440 MHz

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.7. Basic transmision loss variance, Pidcoke, 440 MHz. 

10-1 100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Pidcoke: 1360 MHz (Trailer)

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.8. Basic transmision loss variance (trailer), Pidcoke, 1360 MHz. 
 22 

10-1 100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Pidcoke: 1360 MHz (Van)

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.9. Basic transmision loss variance (van), Pidcoke, 1360 MHz. 

10-1 100101

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Pidcoke: 1920 MHz

Distance (km)

Path Loss (dB)

free space

mean

90% level

99% level

+ sigma

 - sigma

Figure 4.10. Basic transmision loss variance, Pidcoke, 1920 MHz. 
 23 

Figure 4.11. Basic transmission loss map, 440 MHz, Anderson Mountain. 

Figure 4.12. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Anderson Mountain. 
 24 

Figure 4.13 Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Anderson Mountain. 

Figure 4.14 Basic transmission loss map, 1920 MHz, Anderson Mountain. 
 25 

Figure 4.15. Basic transmission loss map, 440 MHz, Pidcoke. 

Figure 4.16. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Pidcoke. 
 26 

Figure 4.17. Basic transmission loss map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Pidcoke. 

Figure 4.18. Basic transmission loss map, 1920 MHz, Pidcoke. 
 27 

Figure 4.19. Basic transmission loss differential for low versus high 1360 MHz receive 

antennas from Anderson Mountain transmitter site. 

Figure 4.20. Basic transmission loss differential for low versus high 1360 MHz receive 

antennas from Pidcoke transmitter site. 

90

110

130

150

170

0.5 1 2 5 10 20

1360 MHz High Fit

1360 MHz Low Fit

1360 MHz High

1360 MHz Low

y=a10log(bx) max dev:27.1, r

2

=0.409

a=3.54, b=1010

y=a10log(bx) max dev:29.0, r

2

=0.458

a=3.48, b=1359

Distance)km)

LBT(dB)

High/Low Antenna Performance, Ft. Hood, Texas, Anderson Mtn. Transmitter Site 

90

110

130

150

170

1 2 5 10

High Fit

Low Fit

1360 High

1360 Low

y=a10log(bx) max dev:33.1, r

2

=0.449

a=4.44, b=300

y=a10log(bx) max dev:28.6, r

2

=0.365

a=3.45, b=3105

Distance(km)

LBT(dB)

High/Low Antenna Performance, Pidcoke Transmitter Site, Ft. Hood, Texas.
 28 

max delay

avg

impulse peak

noise peak

pulse depth used for

delay statistics

10 dB or 20 dB

interval of

discrimination

(ID)

> 3 dB

RMS delay spread

Figure 5.1. Idealized impulse response diagram with descriptive terminology. 
 29 

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10

-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 20DB; Max Delay

440 MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.2. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: maximum delay CDF. 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10

-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 20DB; Mean Delay

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.3. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: mean delay CDF. 
 30 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 20DB; RMS Delay Spread

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.4. Anderson Mt. 20 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF. 

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 20DB; Max Delay

440 MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.5. Pidcoke 20 dB ID: maximum delay CDF. 
 31 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 20DB; Mean Delay

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.6. Pidcoke 20 dB ID: mean delay CDF. 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 20DB; RMS Delay Spread

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.7. Pidcoke 20 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF. 
 32 

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 10DB; Max Delay

440 MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.8. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: maximum delay CDF. 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 10DB; Mean Delay

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.9. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: mean delay CDF. 
 33 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

FH ANDERSON MT 10DB; RMS Delay Spread

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.10. Anderson Mt. 10 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF. 

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 10DB; Max Delay

440 MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 5 10 15 20

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.11. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: maximum delay CDF. 
 34 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 10DB; Mean Delay

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.12. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: mean delay CDF. 

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch1 >

PIDCOKE 10DB; RMS Delay Spread

440 MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch2 >

1360 LOW MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Prob. Ch3 >

1360 HIGH MHz

0 1 2 3 4 5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Time (us)

Prob. Ch4 >

1920 MHz

Figure 5.13. Pidcoke 10 dB ID: RMS delay spread CDF. 
 35 

Figure 5.14. Delay spread (S) map, 440 MHz, Anderson Mountain transmitter site. 

Figure 5.15. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Anderson Mountain 

transmitter site. 
 36 

Figure 5.16. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Anderson Mountain 

transmitter site. 

Figure 5.17. Delay spread (S) map, 1920 MHz, Anderson Mountain transmitter site. 
 37 

Figure 5.18. Delay spread (S) map, 440 MHz, Pidcoke transmitter site. 

Figure 5.19. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (low antenna), Pidcoke transmitter site. 
 38 

Figure 5.20. Delay spread (S) map, 1360 MHz (high antenna), Pidcoke transmitter site. 

Figure 5.21. Delay spread (S) map, 1920 MHz, Pidcoke transmitter site. 
 39 

APPENDIX A: ANTENNA CALIBRATION 

The transmitter and receiver antennas were calibrated in a variety of environments. This 

is especially important for the receive antennas, which were inexpensive monopoles with 

limited calibration data available from the manufacturer’s. The 440 MHz transmit dipole 

also had poor calibration data. The 1360 MHz and 1920 MHz transmit dipole antennas 

were high quality and had manufacturers calibration data which agree with our 

measurements. Calibrations consisted of two far-field tests which included the 

measurement vehicle and a third test which utilized the NIST anechoic chamber. The 

NIST test used a circular ground plane for the monopole antennas. 

The first far-field test utilized a calibrated EMCO horn antenna for the 1360 MHz and 

1920 MHz source and a calibrated Antenna Specialists discone antenna at 440 MHz. The 

source antenna gains are listed in Table A1. 

Table A1. Source Antenna Gain Data used for the Far-Field Tests 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Gain(dBi) 

440 Antenna Specialists 14 

1360 EMCO 7.5 

1920 EMCO 7.8 

For this test, transmit antennas were positioned on the roof of wing 4 of the Radio 

Building and the van was parked east of wing 2 along the south access road. The radio 

path is approximately 148 m and the elevation difference is 10.4 m. The van was oriented 

broadside to the transmit antennas at 5 sites 1 m apart. The elevation angle was 

approximately 4°. Measurements were made on two separate days and averaged. The 

azimuth pattern of the 1360 MHz transmitter dipole was also measured. Averaged gain 

measurements for the field trail antennas are summarized in Tables A2 and A3. 

Table A2. Gain Measurements for the Receiving Antennas 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Antenna Gain(dBi) 

Specification 

Antenna Gain(dBi) 

Measured 

440 Larson 5/8 λ monopole 5.2 4.8 

1360(low) Larson 1/4 λ monopole None -3.4 

1920 Andrew PCS monopole 3 .75 

 

Table A3. Gain Measurements for the Transmitting Antennas 

Frequency 

(MHz) 

Manufacturer Gain(dBi) 

Specification 

Gain(dBi) 

Measured 

440 Cushcraft FRX430 omni directional dipole 5 0.55 

1360 Dorne&Margolin DM-Q130-1 directional 12 11.33 

1920 Andrew PCS-0190A-006 omni directional 6.9 6.9 
 40 

Pattern measurements for the D&M antenna are given in Table A4. These results agreed

well with the 360° pattern supplied by the manufacturer. The manufacturer’s data was

used to create a lookup table. 

Table A4. 1360 MHz Dorne & Margolin Gain Measurements versus Azimuth Angle 

G(0°) G(90°) G(180°) G(270°) 

11.3 dBi 7.3 dBi 1.3 dBi 4.3 dBi 

A second set of far field tests were made at the ITS Table Mountain site, where a 360°

azimuth pattern measurement of the receiving antennas and measurement van 

combination could be made. These tests were made at three distances at an elevation

angle of 0°. The source antennas used were the same as in Table A1 except for the 440

MHz measurement, which utilized the 440 MHz Cushcraft dipole. The 440 MHz source 

gain has been adjusted to reflect the calibration of this antenna in the NIST chamber, as

reported in the last section of this appendix. The average gain measurement over all 

angles and distances is given in Table A5. Figure A1 is the 360° pattern showing the 

influence of the van and shadowing by the mast on the roof. On this plot, 0° gives results 

for the van pointed head on to the calibration antenna. Also included are results for a 

1360 MHz trailer mounted antenna. 

Figure A1. Antenna patterns measured at Table Mountain showing gain above isotropic versus van 

azimuth. 
 41 

Table A5. Averaged Table Mountain Azimuth Gain Measurements 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Mounting Average Gain(dBi) 

Measured 

440 Larson 5/8 λ monopole Roof 4.1 

1360 Larson 1⁄4 λ monopole Roof -0.2 

1360 Larson 1⁄4 λ monopole Trailer -1.7 

1920 Andrew PCS monopole Roof 1.5 

The Table Mountain measurements show the effects of the measurement van, shadowing 

and multipath from the ground reflection. The roof-mounted antennas were shadowed by 

the van mast at about 180°. This produced a 3 to 5 dB drop for about 10% of the pattern 

for the 440 MHz roof antenna. The 1360 MHz roof antenna has about 3-dB variability 

but no apparent shadowing. The 1920 MHz roof antenna has 5 to 10 dB shadowing 

effects for about 10% of the pattern and 3-dB variability. The 1360 MHz trailer antenna 

has a 10 dB drop between 0°and 20°, or about 10% of the pattern. 

 

A third set of measurements was completed in the NIST anechoic chamber. A 1.3 m 

circular ground plane was utilized with the monopole receiving antennas and the vertical 

Antenna Pattern 440 MHz Cuschcraft

-60.00

-50.00

-40.00

-30.00

-20.00

-10.00

0.00

10.00

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Azimuth(Deg)

Gain(dBi)

Series1

Series2

Series3

Figure A2. Gain of 440 MHz Cushcraft transmitter dipole (NIST Chamber). 
 42 

pattern was measured. The vertical pattern of the 440 MHz Cushcraft transmit dipole was 

also measured with no ground plane. Figures A2 to A5 show the patterns for the four 

antennas, and Table A6 lists the measured antenna gains. 

The gain of the 440 MHz Cushcraft dipole has a broad maximum near 90 degrees (on the 

horizon). The monopole antenna measurement plane puts 0° on the horizon. Gain for 

these antennas peak between 15° to 20° although the Larson 5/8 λ monopole has a broad 

peak near the horizon. The gain versus angle is given in Table A6. 

1360 MHz Larson 1/4 wave A 

-20.00

-15.00

-10.00

-5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Degrees Above Horizon

Gain(dBi)

Series1

Series2

Series3

Figure A3. 1360 MHz Larson receiving monopole pattern (NIST Chamber). 
 43 

Antenna Pattern 440 MHz Cuschcraft

-60.00

-50.00

-40.00

-30.00

-20.00

-10.00

0.00

10.00

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Azimuth(Deg)

Gain(dBi)

Series1

Series2

Series3

Figure A4. Gain of 440 MHz Cushcraft transmitter dipole (NIST Chamber). 
 44 

Table A6. Gain Measured in the NIST Anechoic Chamber for the Receiving Monopole 

Antennas 

 Gain(dBi) 

 Larson 440 MHz Larson 1360 

MHz 

Andrew 1920 

MHz 

Cushcraft 440 

MHz 

F(MHz) 435 440 445 1355 1360 1365 1915 1920 1925 435 440 445 

Elevation 

(deg) 

 

0 1.8 1.1 0.8 -1.2 -1.3 -1.4 -0.6 -0.7 -0.9 -23.3 -25.2 -25.2 

5 2.4 1.9 1.6 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 -21.6 -22.7 -21.9 

10 2.8 2.3 2.0 2.5 2.4 2.4 3.0 2.9 2.7 -19.2 -19.6 -18.6 

15 2.7 2.2 2.0 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.3 -16.7 -16.7 -15.9 

20 1.9 1.5 1.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 2.7 2.7 2.4 -14.4 -14.4 -13.8 

25 0.5 0.1 0.1 4.2 4.1 4.1 -0.4 -0.5 -0.6 -12.4 -12.5 -12.1 

30 -2.2 -2.4 -2.1 2.8 2.6 2.5 -8.0 -7.7 -7.5 -11.0 -11.1 -10.8 

35 -6.3 -5.8 -5.0 0.4 0.1 -0.2 -8.5 -8.3 -8.3 -10.3 -10.3 -9.9 

40 -9.7 -8.2 -6.7 -1.7 -2.3 -2.7 -3.1 -3.1 -3.2 -10.4 -10.2 -9.6 

45 -6.3 -6.2 -5.5 -0.5 -0.8 -1.0 -1.7 -1.9 -2.1 -11.7 -11.0 -10.0 

50 -3.4 -3.9 -3.9 0.6 0.4 0.4 -3.8 -3.9 -4.0 -15.1 -13.3 -11.7 

55 -1.9 -2.8 -3.2 -2.5 -2.6 -2.6 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -25.7 -19.6 -16.1 

60 -1.6 -2.8 -3.3 -11.0 -11.6 -11.9 -1.9 -2.2 -2.5 -18.1 -25.1 -49.6 

65 -2.2 -3.5 -4.3 -9.5 -9.8 -10.0 -4.3 -4.4 -4.7 -9.6 -11.9 -14.2 

70 -3.4 -4.9 -5.9 -4.1 -4.1 -4.0 -1.8 -1.7 -1.7 -4.9 -6.3 -7.4 

75 -5.5 -7.0 -8.2 -6.8 -6.6 -6.2 -9.2 -9.7 -10.3 -2.0 -3.0 -3.6 

80 -9.0 -10.6 -11.9 -10.6 -11.1 -11.2 -11.2 -11.6 -12.0 -0.1 -0.8 -1.2 

85 -15.7 -17.6 -19.0 -8.8 -8.9 -8.8 -4.7 -4.8 -4.9 1.1 0.5 0.3 

90 -22.1 -23.1 -24.1 -9.1 -9.2 -9.2 -4.3 -4.3 -4.3 1.7 1.2 1.1 

95 -11.5 -12.9 -13.9 -4.5 -4.4 -4.1 -4.5 -4.4 -4.4 1.6 1.3 1.2 

100 -6.9 -8.3 -9.3 -17.3 -16.8 -16.0 -11.1 -11.6 -12.2 1.2 0.8 0.7 

105 -4.4 -5.6 -6.4 -5.0 -5.3 -5.2 -2.4 -2.4 -2.3 0.2 -0.2 -0.2 

110 -2.8 -3.9 -4.5 -7.4 -7.4 -7.3 -2.5 -2.4 -2.5 -1.4 -1.7 -1.8 

115 -2.0 -2.8 -3.1 -14.9 -13.4 -12.0 -2.1 -2.3 -2.5 -3.8 -4.0 -4.1 

120 -1.9 -2.5 -2.6 -8.9 -8.5 -7.8 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 -7.2 -7.3 -7.1 

125 -2.9 -3.2 -3.0 -1.3 -1.3 -1.0 -1.4 -1.3 -1.3 -12.3 -12.1 -11.4 

130 -5.3 -5.0 -4.3 -0.3 -0.5 -0.4 -0.4 -0.5 -0.7 -19.5 -18.9 -17.3 

135 -9.0 -7.5 -5.9 -2.4 -2.6 -2.7 -0.6 -0.7 -0.9 -17.6 -20.4 -23.1 

140 -7.7 -6.4 -5.2 -2.1 -2.3 -2.3 -4.3 -4.1 -4.0 -14.1 -17.0 -20.8 

145 -3.0 -2.9 -2.5 0.9 0.8 0.9 -5.2 -4.9 -4.6 -13.1 -15.4 -17.8 

150 0.1 -0.1 0.0 3.2 3.2 3.3 -0.7 -0.6 -0.6 -13.3 -15.2 -16.4 

155 2.0 1.7 1.6 4.2 4.2 4.3 2.1 2.0 1.9 -14.9 -16.2 -16.5 

160 3.1 2.6 2.5 3.9 4.0 4.1 3.4 3.2 3.1 -17.8 -18.6 -18.5 

165 3.4 2.9 2.7 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.9 3.7 3.5 -24.3 -24.7 -24.1 

170 3.3 2.7 2.5 1.3 1.3 1.4 3.8 3.7 3.5 -31.9 -31.2 -30.2 

175 2.8 2.2 1.9 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 3.0 2.9 2.8 -19.0 -19.1 -18.7 
 45 

The gain on the horizon (0°) as measured in the anechoic chamber was used for data 

reduction. Data from the chamber for the Cushcraft 440 MHz dipole also was used. The 

azimuth pattern for the 1360 MHz dipole was used when reducing the data. This pattern 

was obtained from the manufacturer and also verified by measurements but not presented 

here. Table A7 and Table A8 give the gain and azimuth patterns used for data reduction. 

Table A7. Receiving Antenna Gain 

Receive Antenna Gains 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Gain (dBi) Azimuth Pattern 

440 Larson 1.2 Omni 

1360 Larson -1.3 Omni 

1920 Andrew -0.7 Omni 

Table A8. Transmitting Antenna Gain 

Transmit Antenna Gains 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Gain (dBi) Azimuth Pattern 

440 Cushcraft 1.7 Omni 

1360 Dorne&Margolin 11.3 Table Lookup 

1920 Andrew 6.9 Omni 

1920 MHz Andrew

-14

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Azim tih(Deg)

Gain(dBi)

Series1

Series2

Series3

Figure A5. 1920 MHz Andrew receiving monopole (NIST Chamber). 
46

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

This Page Intentionally Left Blank
 47 

APPENDIX B: EIRP, ANTENNA GAINS AND SITE COORDINATES 

The transmitter effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) is summarized in Table B1. 

Tables B2 and B3 summarize the antenna gains. Tables B3 and B4 give the GPS 

coordinates of the transmitter sites and the pointing angle for the 1360 MHz directional 

transmit antenna. 

Table B1. EIRP Transmitted at Ft Hood, Texas 

Cell 1 Transmitter EIRP 5/4/99 

F(MHz) PTX(dBm) G TxAntenna (dBi) EIRP(dBm) 

440 35.0 1.7 36.7 

1360 34.0 11.3 45.3 

1920 35.3 6.9 42.2 

Cell 2 Transmitter EIRP 5/5/99 

F(MHz) PTX(dBm) G TxAntenna (dBi) EIRP(dBm) 

440 35.7 1.7 37.4 

1360 34.6 11.3 45.9 

1920 36.3 6.9 43.2 

Table B2. Receiving Antenna Gain Summary 

Receive Antenna Gains 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Gain (dBi) Azimuth Pattern 

440 Larson 1.2 Omni 

1360 Larson -1.3 Omni 

1920 Andrew -0.7 Omni 

Table B3. Transmitter Antenna Gain Summary 

Transmit Antenna Gains 

Frequency(MHz) Manufacturer Gain (dBi) Azimuth Pattern 

440 Cushcraft 1.7 Omni 

1360 Dorne&Margolin 11.3 Table Lookup 

1920 Andrew 6.9 Omni 

Table B4. Transmitter Site Coordinates (NAD83/WGS84) 

Site Latitude °N Longitude °W 

Anderson Mountain 31.13698 -97.89067 

Pidcoke 31.26192 -97.87958 

Table B5. 1360 MHz Transmit Antenna Pointing Angle 

Site Main Beam Boresight Angle

Anderson Mountain N6°E 

Pidcoke E