On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 14:31:22 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

The Bird is in error when it reports the SWR to be 1:1.
This is the poor carpenter blaming his tools. The instrument can only
be valid within its presumed operating conditions. Deliberate misuse
is not a reason to crow about inaccuracy.
The SWR is *NOT* 1:1 anywhere on the load side of the tuner.
This is the poor carpenter asking for his wage for his "craft." The
Bird is accurately responding to the operating conditions it is found
within. The manufacturer of the Bird wattmeter makes no claim as to
the state of match BEFORE the meter; and especially when it is so
obviously and deliberately misused - which in this sliver of
specificity is transparent to the reading.

What is being busted is the claim that a necessary condition of
operation for the Bird was the requirement for a length of 50 Ohm line
to "force" a purely mythical presumption. That myth has been exposed
and discarded.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Owen,

To respond to your last question:
Has anyone experimental evidence to the contrary?
is consistently NO. Your own time at the bench has already drained
the pool of ability in that regard. Your only expectation ever after
having bellied up to the bench is to watch your work being gummed to
death.

However, for completeness' sake, and as no one here really understands
what accuracy is about anyway, there is one factor to be considered.
The numbers offered verge on the limit of the Bird's ability to
resolve a power anyway. There is a built in probability of ±5W of
error from the get-go, and any snake oil salesman can craft an
argument leveraging that error to prove anything. We have seen that
±5W error in the form of an argument that uses both + and - (not
simply one or the other) to please a theory.

Owen, the same experiment with a deliberate mismatch of 3:1 would be
just as effective at busting the myth AND providing data that
overwhelmed the inherent meter inaccuracy.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC