[Amps] 10dB and propagation

[Kim Elmore]

I think the point being made here is not that the equipment is questionable 
(the attenuator could be accurate to +/- 10^-13 dB) but that other things, 
none of which are contrary to what we currently know about HF propagation, 
were going on to confound your interpretation of the data that was collected.

Kim Elmore, N5OP

At 10:02 AM 2/8/2005, you wrote:

>On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Ian White G3SEK wrote:
>
>>R. Measures wrote:
>>>>When measurements don't fit in with everything we already know, real 
>>>>scientists and engineers are trained to ask themselves:
>>>>
>>>>"Is this something really new - am I really another Einstein? Or did I 
>>>>simply get it wrong?"
>>>The question is simply: Is my HP-355 step-attenuator set intermittently 
>>>off by 3db?
>>
>>If you still cannot see that the potential sources of error in your 
>>"propagation experiment" were *vastly* more numerous and complicated than 
>>that, then this horse is dead.
>
>NBS traceable step-attenuator A-B measurement is the gold standard of gain 
>and loss determinations.
>>
>>
>>--
>>73 from Ian G3SEK         'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
>>http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek
>>_______________________________________________
>>Amps mailing list
>>Amps at contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>>
>
>Richard L. Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734.  www.somis.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>Amps mailing list
>Amps at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

                           Kim Elmore, Ph.D.
                        University of Oklahoma
         Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies
"All of weather is divided into three parts: Yes, No, and Maybe. The
greatest of these is Maybe" The original Latin appears to be garbled.