On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 03:37:16 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Owen Duffy wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
and not to be a myth at all. There's 104.17 watts of forward power
through the Bird and 4.17 watts of reflected power back through the
Bird. Why does the Bird ignore those actual power values?

I did not report or even measure such a thing.

Since I realized the Bird forms a Z0-match at its output that
statement should be ammended to say: There 104.17 watts of forward

Why the belated revelation of the Bird 43 coupler Zo? In a post on 9
Oct on the earlier thread I stated:

"My suggestion is that the sampler inside a Bird 43 coupler section is
sufficiently far inside the 50 ohm coupler line to provide
measurements within the instrument's stated accuracy of what is
happening within the 50 ohm coupler, irrespective of whether, for
instance, a 75 ohm line is attached to the coupler on the load side."

You must have read it, you responded to it with your message
.

Perhaps the honest way to deal with the situation is to acknowledge
that your statement quoted at the top of this post was just not true,
rather than to edit the words to shift the context to somewhere else
where it might be true.

It would be gracious of you to return to the myth, read it carefully
and think about it, and to respond restricting yourself to the myth as
stated, without qualification or obfuscation, is it a myth YES or NO.

To save you the hassle of finding it, here is:

The myth: Measurements with a Bird 43 of the conditions on the
Thruline section are invalid unless it has some minimum length of 50
ohm line on both sides of itself.

Myth or not, YES or NO?

Owen
--