Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+s\s+meter\s+calibration\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+s\s+meter\s+calibration\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: nospam4me@juno.com (nospam4me@juno.com); Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:33:05 -0700; Had a quick look at the site... Their amplification abuse page says 3 dB is a one s-unit change on your receiver meter. I was under the impression receiver s-meters were calibrated 50uV for S-9 and 6; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00134.html (9,425 bytes)
2. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: N6BUU@aol.com (N6BUU@aol.com); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:40:18 EDT; << Had a quick look at the site... Their amplification abuse page says 3 dB is a one s-unit change on your receiver meter. I was under the impression receiver s-meters were calibrated 50uV for S-9 an; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00136.html (8,296 bytes)
3. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:15:20 +0100; And the 'S' stands for 'suspicious' mostly, anyway. 73 Peter G3RZP -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00141.html (8,318 bytes)
4. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: K0FF@ARRL.NET (K0FF); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 07:34:06 -0500; Hey Skip, I'll be glad to stir the pot on S Meters, and their total lack of consistency between manufacturers. My FT736R is rated at 4 Microvolts for S-9!. Speaking of which, I've heard a lot of hams; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00143.html (11,398 bytes)
5. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Ian White, G3SEK" <g3sek@ifwtech.com (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 07:45:55 +0100; 50uV/6dB is an IARU recommendation, but it has little effect in real life. The idea of a single input level for S9 came long before modern transceivers, where there is a choice of 2, 3 or even 4 diff; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00144.html (9,635 bytes)
6. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: i4jmy@iol.it (i4jmy@iol.it); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:49:33 +0200; Stated first that we can survive without accurate S meter readings and better we use something else to measure strenghts than communications receivers, the point that's difficult to use the modern re; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00145.html (10,458 bytes)
7. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: N6BUU@aol.com (N6BUU@aol.com); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 13:47:35 EDT; << sets have meters with S-10 on them? Way too much of this CB jargon sneaking into Ham Radio >> gee i wonder why, i guess it's just the PC world we live in!! hank -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contestin; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00152.html (8,640 bytes)
8. SV: [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: sm5ki@algonet.se (sm5ki); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 19:37:02 +0000; As far as I remember Ed Tilton in an old QST was the one who first suggested S9=50uV and 6dB increase beetween the S-points. Right? / Hans SM5KI -- -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps S; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00153.html (11,535 bytes)
9. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Ian White, G3SEK" <g3sek@ifwtech.com (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 20:16:53 +0100; line in That is the kind of thing I meant by: Also it should be possible to compensate for gain variations due to switching in various preamps or attenuators, so that the S-meter indicates the signal; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00156.html (10,244 bytes)
10. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: N6BUU@aol.com (N6BUU@aol.com); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:00:35 EDT; << y low compared with most modern rigs. The manufacturers know that people don't like to give "mean" signal strength reports, so they don't spend money on >> THAT'S ABOUT IT, HAMS LIKE TO SEE THE NE; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00157.html (9,103 bytes)
11. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:57:40 +0100; Ian and all, I gotta put my two cents worth in for this one and even tie it back to AMPS type topics. As has been said before, the manufacturers correctly assume that the majority of buyers are techn; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00159.html (10,398 bytes)
12. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: K0FF@ARRL.NET (K0FF); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:00:57 -0500; Larry, nice summary. In the "old days" things were a LOT simpler. ALL the DXers in our area (St. Louis at the time) used the same (Collins) radios, and at least once a year we would drag our receiver; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00160.html (12,835 bytes)
13. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: k7fm@teleport.com (Colin Lamb); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:07:37 -0700; Where does one draw the line on s-meter calibration? It would not be difficult to compensate for all the adjustments and gain variations of the receiver and convert actual microvolts at the antenna i; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00161.html (10,020 bytes)
14. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:29:22 +0100; That's the idea, George. If you have a few reliable guys in the local area with similar calibrations, it sure does make comparisons easier. And yes, the variables mentioned are factors to be consider; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00162.html (9,583 bytes)
15. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:39:28 +0100; Colin, I pretty much agree with you there. Absolute measurements are simply not required. However accurate delta's are. I write down the absolutes for my chart because they are there and handy. It's; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00163.html (10,021 bytes)
16. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:22:01 +0100; Question # 1: so what does it tell you as an operator if a signal is 50 microvolts or 25 microvolts in terms of real, on air operation? bearing in mind that the noise on 80m can easily be S5 and a re; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00170.html (9,800 bytes)
17. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:06:36 +0100; If we are going to set the signal generator to 50 microvolts pd (which is -73dBm) and then say that means 50 microvolts at the input to the receiver, that assumes the receiver input impedance. (Incid; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00171.html (10,995 bytes)
18. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: i4jmy@iol.it (i4jmy@iol.it); Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 12:20:44 +0200; The laboratory generator accuracy is expressed in dBm and is relative to its output power when closed on its nominal load. The receiver S- meter circuit is not a power meter but only a selective (rel; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00174.html (11,161 bytes)
19. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:51:32 +0100; In this context, not a thing. Since the transceivers in question are operated in the same environment as my body is, and since my body has less stability over temperature than any radio, it turns out; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00183.html (12,298 bytes)
20. [AMPS] s meter calibration (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:00:13 +0100; If you are an approved type testing laboratory, your typical conducted power measurement to a 95% confidence level is +/-0.75dB. That's 1262 to 1782 watts. Larry, you got any buddies at NIST who can; /archives//html/Amps/2000-06/msg00194.html (9,274 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]