I am trying my hand for the first time at Radio Mobile and have created a radio link to the best of my ability. I was unable to figure out how to add trees, so I just lowered the antenna height of each side to equal the height of the trees (70’) residing on the highest elevation point of my link. The numbers don’t look too promising to me, but then again this is my first time using this software and have never compared it to real life results. I’m hoping that some of you can look at the link below and give me some feedback as to whether you would put the resources into trying to close this link. It has huge upside if I can get it in but may break me if I try and it doesn’t work. I also included the link as it would be without factoring in the trees. Let me know what you think.
Justin
At first glance, No. You have your heights set to 460’ and the other side @ 393’ on the first graphic. That is to just clear the hill, but you definately need clearance for the fresnel zone. Your second graphic, click on the peak of the hill, and above will give you “Clearance” to guage your tree height. You can also see it on the map as to where the peak is and make a judgement call as to if there are trees there or not.
Do you have towers that are over 500’ tall? Cat5 is scared of heights… 
You can only go up a few hundered (300’).
Eric
Thanks for the comments. To answer a couple of your questions, antenna heights are 195’ and 160’, but I had to add the elevation of each location to get them to show up correctly on the radio link (I’m missing something somewhere in the program that normally takes care of this). As for the trees, the second picture is the actual radio link and there are ~70’ trees at the highest point. In the first picture the software says that I will have a -76 rx level which should be good enough, but I somehow doubt that this will work, and as such wanted to solicit some more opinions.
An antenna which has 195ft.??? That approx. 60 meter long!!!
Configure the unit elevation properly.
I took the antenna height to be height from the ground and not the physical dimension of the antenna. Am I wrong?
No, you are right. I have seen calculations with antenna heights of 1700 meters. No mast in the world will reach that! 
It all depends on your reference level. On big distances it will be usually the globe’s surface.
Regarding your trees. I work with relative short 5Ghz links, <8km, but even with small Fresnel’s on these links, trees can be a killer for the CCQ of the link. Gains can be very high to high, but at the same time lost of packages are high so real-time connections (VOIP, gaming) will suffer.
Use the highest gain antenna’s you can get, it will narrow the fresnell zone more.
It is better to tune your radio’s down with high dB antenna’s then to use small antenna’s with highpower radio’s. High power will also increase the strength and amount of tree-leaves reflected signals with will increase the noise on your receiver.
I have my best results with good antenna’s with tuned down radio’s. And as a bonus the radio lives longer, the adapter too (less power consumption) and on a wide scale it safes energy! (Not that it will be noticeable on a single unit.)
Good luck!
Your antenna heights are incorrect. The measurement on Radio Mobile is in meters, not feet. Once you change those to the correct settings, you will see the link will not work at all.
I did put the heights in meters after doing the conversion from feet, so they are correct. I don’t think I’m going to pursue this one though since I don’t know for sure that it will work.