"Tom Ring" wrote
As someone who has watched from the sidelines for quite a while, I
think
you need to consult a psychiatrist, You really are obsessed over
this.
I am not kidding, no ****.

You seem normal in most of your responses, but when it comes to SWR
meters you really do seem to lose it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

Doctor Tom,

Hasn't it occurred to you that if most of my responses are normal then
there's no reason to suppose my response to so- called SWR meters
should be otherwise.

If ever I should feel the need to consult a psychiatrist then I would
make arrangements to see one. I would ignore the unqualified opinions
of quacks and old-wives on this newsgroup who have allowed themselves
to be brainwashed just by the mis-naming of an indicating instrument.

My only reason for continuing with the subject is to provide some
education to novices although it seems some of the 'experts' are also
in need of it.

If YOU wish to continue with the subject then please say which of my
very few earlier technical statements you think are incorrect, and why
you think so.

If the discussion should drift towards my personal character then it
will be taken as an indication you have lost the argument and have
nothing further to say.

Otherwise go QRT
----
Reg, G4FGQ

I wonder how many band openings both of you have missed while participating
in this cyber ****ing contest?

--

Charlie


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...

"Tom Ring" wrote
As someone who has watched from the sidelines for quite a while, I
think
you need to consult a psychiatrist, You really are obsessed over
this.
I am not kidding, no ****.

You seem normal in most of your responses, but when it comes to SWR
meters you really do seem to lose it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

Doctor Tom,

Hasn't it occurred to you that if most of my responses are normal then
there's no reason to suppose my response to so- called SWR meters
should be otherwise.

If ever I should feel the need to consult a psychiatrist then I would
make arrangements to see one. I would ignore the unqualified opinions
of quacks and old-wives on this newsgroup who have allowed themselves
to be brainwashed just by the mis-naming of an indicating instrument.

My only reason for continuing with the subject is to provide some
education to novices although it seems some of the 'experts' are also
in need of it.

If YOU wish to continue with the subject then please say which of my
very few earlier technical statements you think are incorrect, and why
you think so.

If the discussion should drift towards my personal character then it
will be taken as an indication you have lost the argument and have
nothing further to say.

Otherwise go QRT
----
Reg, G4FGQ

Charlie wrote:

I wonder how many band openings both of you have missed while participating
in this cyber ****ing contest?


Let's see, I have made one comment on the subject of Reg and SWR
measurement. Ever.

So probably none.

And all I said was that he seemed to be obsessive. I never said
anything about the validity of his arguments, so I cerainly was not
involved in a ****ing contest.

I think it's all quite amusing actually.

tom
K0TAR

I think it's all quite amusing actually.

tom
K0TAR
===================================

So do I.
----
Reg, G4FGQ

Reg Edwards wrote:
I think it's all quite amusing actually.

tom
K0TAR

===================================

So do I.
----
Reg, G4FGQ



It ceased to be amusing 500 posts ago, but Reg has
a point, however strained.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Gentlemen:
fFirst of all, stop bickering.
Second, you can't measure SWR. you can measure incident power (going to
the load) and reflected power power (coming back from the load). This
is done with a 20$ CB type power meter or with a 60 kilobucks network
analyzer, doesn't really matter!
You can CALCULATE the SWR using the formula. That, you can do!!!
what we call SWR meter s are actually directional couplers that employ
one form or another of phase and magnitude comparisons to separate
incident from reflected power and give a relative reading. The
measurement itself is meaningless without calibration and the coupler
operates in a ratiometric manner, i.e. the output is based on ratios of
signals, not their absolute value!
Alex 4Z5KS

"Saandy wrote

you can't measure SWR.
=========================================

I am pleased you agree with me.

=========================================
You can CALCULATE the SWR using the formula.
=========================================

But of what use is the SWR it after you have calculated it?

To what transmission line does it apply? Where is it? What are the
locations of max-volts and min-volts? It does NOT apply to the line
between transmitter and antenna. I suggest it exists only in your
imagination. ;o)

It is the name of "SWR Meter" which leads to confusion,
misunderstandings and arguments. The name says the instrument does
something which it does not do. With the help of old-wives, novices
are led astray and are stuck with incorrect ideas about standing-waves
for the rest of the lives.

Just change the name to TLI (Transmitter Loading Indicator) which is
what it is and does very well. The true meaning and associations of
SWR will then emerge and all will be flooded with the light of reason.
----
Reg, G4FGQ.

"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...

"Saandy wrote

you can't measure SWR.
=========================================

I am pleased you agree with me.

=========================================
You can CALCULATE the SWR using the formula.
=========================================

But of what use is the SWR it after you have calculated it?

To what transmission line does it apply? Where is it? What are the
locations of max-volts and min-volts? It does NOT apply to the line
between transmitter and antenna. I suggest it exists only in your
imagination. ;o)

It is the name of "SWR Meter" which leads to confusion,
misunderstandings and arguments. The name says the instrument does
something which it does not do. With the help of old-wives, novices
are led astray and are stuck with incorrect ideas about standing-waves
for the rest of the lives.

Just change the name to TLI (Transmitter Loading Indicator) which is
what it is and does very well. The true meaning and associations of
SWR will then emerge and all will be flooded with the light of reason.
----
Reg, G4FGQ.

Hi Reg

I recognize that you know far more about VSWR and measuring complex load
impedances than I do.
I'm writing this to represent the "other side" of an arguement that states
that VSWR *cant* be measured. I claim that VSWR *can* be measured and that
VSWR can be used to identify the impedance terminating the transmission
line.

Jerry

Jerry Martes wrote:
I claim that VSWR *can* be measured and that
VSWR can be used to identify the impedance terminating the transmission
line.

The tuner SWR meter only indicates the SWR on the 50 ohm coax
between the transmitter and the tuner. However, I have an SWR
meter on the antenna side of my tuner and it does indeed indicate
the SWR on my transmission line.

XMTR--SWR meter#1--tuner--SWR meter#2--50 ohm coax to a G5RV

SWR meter#2 does indeed indicate the SWR on the coax feed to
my G5RV. It obviously does not indicate the SWR at the antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:54:35 GMT, "Jerry Martes"
wrote:


that VSWR *cant* be measured. I claim that VSWR *can* be measured and that
VSWR can be used to identify the impedance terminating the transmission
line.

Jerry, unless you redefine the term "impedance", you cannot generally
measure impedance with a typical reflectometer style SWR meter.

Impedance is a complex quantity (ie with real and imaginary parts).
There are an infinite number of different impedances (being
combinations of the real and imaginary parts) that could cause a given
SWR on a given line in most cases. (The exception is the case when
VSWR=1, you do know the impedance, it is the nominal Zo for which the
instrument was calibrated.)

Whilst you can work out the SWR that will result from a specific
impedance on a specific Zo line, you cannot do the inverse, you don't
have enough information.

Owen
--