>I say this is still flawed! Not a good enough answer. Everything has
>to be accounted for Tom. This isn't as easy as the IRS's EZ-FORM.
? Yeah, Tom's "explanation" came up short on science. However, you
gotta know when to fold. Arguing with Tom is sorta like arguing with a
>>Outgoing power readings include both forward and reflected power
>>that was "bounced" off the PA output port.
>And I thought it checked into the tankard to hang out and have a few...
>But I beleive it bounced off of there for now. Somehow this has
>a familar ring to it...
>>That's why directional coupler wattmeters read higher when the load has
>>high SWR and the transmitter is matched to the new feedline impedance.
>>Reverse power reads only the reflected power, so you can simply subtract
>>the reflected power out from the forward reading and you have true
>Within 8% with a Bird 4314B. All measurements. So you could have up to
>total error in a >1:3.0:1v.s.w.r., with two different peak reading
>values. And thats before we even consider all the variables you missed
>that error you.
>It's got be real love Tom or no Love at all! The F.C.C. isn't interested
>in your approximations. And personally neither am I. 1500 watts P.E.P.
>no 1515w P.E.P. (1%) at the antenna feed point. The most we could run
>with your methods under worse case is 1260w P.E.P. to be safe.
>And under the best conditions we could run at 1620w P.E.P. pushing
>limits and safely only 1380w P.E.P.
>I side with Rich and my amp manufacture aswell as my better judgement.
>And I don't really care if you want to attach a 50ohm load instead
>of the antenna it makes no difference. Your still way off.
? The FCC inspected a station in Daly City, CA. The measured power on a
Bird was 1700w PEP. The FCC did not write him up. , , , Can you
imagine the highway patrol giving a ticket for 17mph when the speed limit
- cheers, Jerry.
R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com