|
S-Meter Calibration Standards?
|
"Avery Fineman" wrote in message ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. There is no "standard". You will often see it mentioned as 6 db of power per S-unit. At one time 50 microvolts into the receiver was S-9 and you went down 6 db of power per S-unit from there. I doubt that any receiver will follow that so called "standard". |
I find that most of them seem to sort of follow the rule that 4uV is S9, 3dB
down is each S-Point, that's for VHF/UHF. Sam "bviel" wrote in message ... The rule voor 50µV = S9 does still exists, this is voor HF, @50 Ohm input impedance at receiver. "They" (radioamateurs) use another rule for VHF. It's in the software MultiCalc, Google will find the adres, it's for free. Official or not, if everyone use this rule then it is a standard for me. Greetings Bas. "Avery Fineman" schreef in bericht ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 24/11/2004 |
Avery Fineman wrote:
Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. There is an IARU recommendation, which originated in Region1 (Europe/Africa) and I believe has been adopted by IARU world-wide. The Region 1 recommendation is: http://www.algonet.se/~k-jarl/ssa/IARU/smeter.html Google should also bring up the full technical paper behind this, and probably the current IARU recommendation. ISTR there's something on the ARRL website too. The 1990 Region 1 recommendation simply states that: STANDARDISATION OF S-METER READINGS 1. One S-unit corresponds to a signal level difference of 6 dB, 2. On the bands below 30 MHz a meter deviation of S-9 corresponds to an available power of -73 dBm from a continuous wave signal generator connected to the receiver input terminals, 3. On the bands above 144 MHz this available power shall be -93 dBm, 4. The metering system shall be based on quasi-peak detection with an attack time of 10 msec +/- 2 msec and a decay time constant of at least 500 msec. IARU functions very much like an Entmoot...only...not...quite...so...hoom...hasty. In 2004, they are just starting to think about the gap between 30MHz and 144MHz: http://home.hccnet.nl/a.dogterom/Vie...4_19_Chair.rtf But all the other comments about S-meters are true as well: that no S-meter actually conforms to this recommendation; that it makes no practical difference; and that hardly anyone cares. There's a very good web page with lots of practical measurements, at: http://www.seed-solutions.com/gregor...rimentation/SM eterBlues.htm -- 73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek |
If you're wondering if S-meters are calibrated to some standard, the
answer is that they're not. S-meters simply read the AGC voltage, which is only approximately logarithmic. Therefore, the number of dB per S unit typically varies from one part of the scale to another. For example, the S-meter in my Icom 730, on 40 meters, preamp off, varies from 1.3 to 4.0 dB per S-unit depending on where on the scale you are. The "10 dB" increments over S-9 vary from 5.6 to 13.5 dB. Receiver manufacturers are free to make the sensitivity whatever they want, and seldom exceed about 5 dB per S-unit, because users complain that the meter is too "Scotch" (insensitive) if they do. There is a tendency for receivers to be calibrated to about 50 microvolts at one point on the meter, S-9, and there's often a calibration adjustment for this. Any "standard" is useless at best and misleading at worst, because it bears no relation to what S-meters really read. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Avery Fineman wrote: Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. |
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 05:56:42 +0100, "bviel" wrote:
The rule voor 50µV = S9 does still exists, this is voor HF, @50 Ohm input impedance at receiver. "They" (radioamateurs) use another rule for VHF. It's in the software MultiCalc, Google will find the adres, it's for free. Official or not, if everyone use this rule then it is a standard for me. Greetings Bas. "Avery Fineman" schreef in bericht ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. On HF there is no need for an S-meter standard because it seems to be the rule to give report 59. If you don't you soon have a bad reputation of giving wrong reports I installed an MC3356 log detector and calibrated it for S9 = 50uV. For about 15 years there has never been any signal of S9+30dB, most reports should be around 539....579, but again you logging problems, because everybody expect 599 and some log programs don't include the reports, they are supposed to be 599 73 Jan-Martin LA8AK (ex-G5BFV) --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
"Avery Fineman" wrote in message ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. My homebrew solid state receiver (see QRZ.COM) uses 5 dB per S-unit. S9 corresponds to -73 dBm available power, which is 100 microvolts open-circuit from a 50 ohm sig gen, or 50 microvolts into a 50 ohm load. Available power and open-circuit voltage are used because the input inpedance of the receiver is not guaranteed to be 50 ohms. I use 5 dB per S unit because it compresses the scale a little and it also agrees more closely with the intuitive listening test measure that I have used for many years. The upper end of the scale is 30 dB above S9, which is -43 dBm, a very strong signal. Signals stronger than S9+30 dB I don't bother to measure. At S1 the signal level is -73 - 40 = -113 dBm. Signals weaker than that S1 I don't try to quantify. My receiver has a low noise RF preamp with 8 dB of gain that I use on the 12 and 10 meter bands, when those bands are quiet. This makes the S meter less accurate but I don't worry about that. To get an S meter reading I turn off the preamp briefly. My receiver has a custom made, computer printed scale using a calibrated sig gen, and there are two trimpot adjustments, one for the low end and one for the high end. This circuit uses voltage regulated opamps. The S meter dynamics are adjusted using RC time constants. My S meter is accurate within +/- 2 dB from 160 M to 10 M, because the receiver is designed for this accuracy. Because of the IF and RF circuit design, the scale calibration is fairly correct and reliable, as I mentioned. Bill W0IYH |
"William E. Sabin" wrote in message ... "Avery Fineman" wrote in message ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. My homebrew solid state receiver (see QRZ.COM) uses 5 dB per S-unit. S9 corresponds to -73 dBm available power, which is 100 microvolts open-circuit from a 50 ohm sig gen, or 50 microvolts into a 50 ohm load. Available power and open-circuit voltage are used because the input inpedance of the receiver is not guaranteed to be 50 ohms. I use 5 dB per S unit because it compresses the scale a little and it also agrees more closely with the intuitive listening test measure that I have used for many years. The upper end of the scale is 30 dB above S9, which is -43 dBm, a very strong signal. Signals stronger than S9+30 dB I don't bother to measure. At S1 the signal level is -73 - 40 = -113 dBm. Signals weaker than that S1 I don't try to quantify. My receiver has a low noise RF preamp with 8 dB of gain that I use on the 12 and 10 meter bands, when those bands are quiet. This makes the S meter less accurate but I don't worry about that. To get an S meter reading I turn off the preamp briefly. My receiver has a custom made, computer printed scale using a calibrated sig gen, and there are two trimpot adjustments, one for the low end and one for the high end. This circuit uses voltage regulated opamps. The S meter dynamics are adjusted using RC time constants. My S meter is accurate within +/- 2 dB from 160 M to 10 M, because the receiver is designed for this accuracy. Because of the IF and RF circuit design, the scale calibration is fairly correct and reliable, as I mentioned. Bill W0IYH My receiver also has a 20 dB antenna input attenuator that can be switched in from the front panel. This extends the upper signal range to S9 + 50 dB. I use it very rarely. Bill W0IYH |
On HF there is no need for an S-meter standard because it seems to be
the rule to give report 59. If you don't you soon have a bad reputation of giving wrong reports A signal doesn't have to be S9 to be heard 5 by 9. I would usually tell the guy on the other end what the S meter read, and also how readable he was. When the band is quiet QRN wise, I could honestly give a 59 report to someone hardly moving the meter. OTOH with heavy QRM+QRN someone could be pumping 30db over and still be a rough copy. |
"Ken Scharf" wrote in message ... On HF there is no need for an S-meter standard because it seems to be the rule to give report 59. If you don't you soon have a bad reputation of giving wrong reports A signal doesn't have to be S9 to be heard 5 by 9. I would usually tell the guy on the other end what the S meter read, and also how readable he was. When the band is quiet QRN wise, I could honestly give a 59 report to someone hardly moving the meter. OTOH with heavy QRM+QRN someone could be pumping 30db over and still be a rough copy. Then you are still passing out wrong signal reports. The first one would be something like 5 x 2 or 5 x 3 and the second one would be 2 x 9 or 3 x 9. The first number is how well you can understand what is being said and the second is how strong the signal is. |
There has been a de-facto HF standard for 60 years.
The USA military first used it in specifications of radio equipment when placing contracts with manufacturers around the end of WW2. There may have been some restrictions on publicity at the time. The Standard is 6 dB per S-unit and 50 micro-volts into 50 ohms at S=9. Therefore an S-meter is essentially a power or wattmeter. The Standard is quite logically derived. The 6 dB fits in very nicely between a typical receiver's internal noise level (S=0) and a typical receiver's signal overload point (S=9+30 or 40 dB). S=9 is about half way up the scale which is linear in dB's, or S-units, from one end to the other. There's nothing wrong with the standard. If your S-meter reads incorrectly then don't blame the standard - re-calibrate the meter. If you can't re-calibrate it blame the poor quality of the meter. I have two relatively modern commercial transceivers plus two home-brewed transceivers. Their S-meters are accurate enough for the intended purpose. What more should I expect? ---- Reg, G4FGQ |
In article , "William E. Sabin"
writes: My receiver has a custom made, computer printed scale using a calibrated sig gen, and there are two trimpot adjustments, one for the low end and one for the high end. This circuit uses voltage regulated opamps. The S meter dynamics are adjusted using RC time constants. My S meter is accurate within +/- 2 dB from 160 M to 10 M, because the receiver is designed for this accuracy. Because of the IF and RF circuit design, the scale calibration is fairly correct and reliable, as I mentioned. Bill W0IYH Thanks, Bill. I'm doing essentially the same...and expect the overall receiver response to the flat within +/- 1 db within an octave and a half tuning range. Accuracy of the S-Meter is only as good as the RF level accuracy of the calibrating RF source but that's another task and I have confidence in that. But, I have to start someplace and that is why I asked about a "standard." I know that the U.S. military didn't bother with any receiver S-Meter calibration standards since around 1980, only approximate differential signal strength readings if there was an indicator at all. |
In article , Roy Lewallen
writes: Any "standard" is useless at best and misleading at worst, because it bears no relation to what S-meters really read. Roger that, and I've heard all kinds of "599" reports on-air, too. :-) In the project I have on-going, this receiver's S-Meter (there mainly for nostalgia purposes and because I've gotten a few old-style microammeters that I can use) will read the average carrier power (integrated to a time-constant yet to be settled on) at the AM detector using a half of a quad op-amp integrator. That same detector provides the AGC control line with appropriate DC offset for the MC1349 gain blocks, but with (maybe) different integration time-constants. As for the RF input to the antenna connector, that is known within +/- 2 db down to -130 dbm by separate calibration of my HP 608 or 606 signal generator. When completed, this particular receiver S-Meter will be as accurate, with a custom scale plate, as that signal generator output will allow. Of course, to fit the "convention" of those gratuitous "599" reports, I could borrow from the auto industry's cheapie "gas gauge" which has a single bulb showing "low gas" on the dashboard...using an LED driven by an op-amp integrator-comparator for high-tech. The indicator would show "I got signal" or "I got noise" to fit... :-) |
In article , "Ian White, G3SEK"
writes: Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. There is an IARU recommendation, which originated in Region1 (Europe/Africa) and I believe has been adopted by IARU world-wide. Thanks, Ian, and thanks to all others responding. A plus to Reg Edwards for mentioning the U.S. military receiver specs which I was hunting around for but could not find. :-( Reason for asking is that I'm going to make a meter scale for a little receiver a-building, using (nobody blanch, please) MS Paint from a scanner (accurate 1:1) digitization of the removed meter scale plate. I've done that with a normal-expanded scale meter on a 120 W variable autotransformer box used on the bench. MS Paint will do color in 256-color mode for a better appearance. An inkjet printout on heavy photo paper stock results in a fine-grain scale sturdy enough to replace the stock plate in a little 2 1/2" microammeter. Note: That works only on the old-style meters with removeable scale plates (screw mounting type). Newer snap-together plastic case types aren't recommended for that. That method started on wondering how accurate an ordinary scanner was...solved by scanning a 6-inch metal scale, printing it, then comparing the real scale to the printout. By eyeball it was dead-on! :-) I've done that for drill guides on PC board stock used for both circuit boards and small enclosures since and find it very time-economical. Machine shop accurate it isn't but then my home shop drill locations were never that accurate using scribe marks on "dye-chem" blue lacquer painted on aluminum. :-) [rubber cement holds the paper printout on the work, removes easily afterwards] |
Most people appear to be fatally attempting to use, in reverse, their favourite S-meter as a means of calibrating the Standard. No wonder we have so many different standards around. The difficulties in making an accurate power meter lie solely in the very wide range of power levels encountered. 0 to S-9 corresponds to 9 times 6 dB = 54 dB. S-9 to +40 dB corresponds to 40 dB. Making a very high total range of 94 dB for a power meter. That explains why S-9 usually appears just over half way up the scale. For a range of 94 dB it is not beyond modern technology to make a linear dB scale out of it. The limitation is manufacturing cost. But who wants to pay an extra hundred dollars to replace a receiver they are already happy with. Of course, if you MUST have an accurate S-meter, the cheap way is to obtain a blank meter scale, a fine-nibbed pen, a bottle of black ink, a signal generator, and a 0-100 dB switched attenuator. You will proudly end up with a work of art and a beautifully cramped scale at the bottom end. But when done it's as accurate as you like! Hint: There's no need to obtain a new blank scale if the existing scale can just be turned over to its white side. Such small divergencies can make restful breaks in between investigations of skin depths at 1 to 10 Hz of the ocean bottom of transatlantic submarine cables. ---- Reg |
Just to tidy up.
And I've been through this before but I'm just a bloody foreigner who favours French wine. The S-meter is a power meter. The standard receiver input impedance is 50 ohms. That's why you get a conjugal match when you switch the transmit tuner from transmit to receive but you don't get such a match when you switch back. The standard, HF, 50 microvolts at S-9 into 50 ohms corresponds to 50 pico-watts which is an inconvenient quantity to refer to in signal strength reports. Hence the popular S-units. S-9 requires a standard 50-ohm signal generator, set to a standard open-circuit 100 micro-volts, to be connected to the receiver. Receiver manufacturers in their maintenance manuals usually prescibe this at the non-descript frequency of 7 MHz. The internal thermal and other noise level of a typical receiver with an input stage consisting of a balanced modulator (the first frequency changer), referred to the receiver's input terminals, with a receiver SSB bandwidth of 4 KHz, is of the order of 60 dB below S-9. That is a little less than S-zero on the meter. A signal level of the same order as the noise takes the meter to S-zero. A signal level of S-9 plus 40 dB, or 40 dB above 50 pico-watts, corresponds to a signal input voltage of 50 micro-volts times 100 which equals 5 milli-volts. At which point a good receiver begins to overload and suffers from non-linear intermod products. Hence we have a meter range of 54 + 40 = 94 dB as displayed on a typical meter. All this fits in very nicely with the recognised S-meter Calibration Standard. (I do hope I have not made an arithmetical error. But I'm sure you Americans get the general idea nevertheless.) ---- Reg, G4FGQ |
"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
... Most people appear to be fatally attempting to use, in reverse, their favourite S-meter as a means of calibrating the Standard. No wonder we have so many different standards around. We have seen a dozen or so posters indicate that S9=50uv Nowadays, very few rigs have analog meters. Instead, they have a computer that can take that AGC voltage and display it however the computer decides. In the Icom calibration procedure for the 706, there are three calibration points known by the computer ... S0 (0 uv), S9 (50 uv), and S9+60 (50 mv). The calibration procedure sets these three with known inputs, and presumably the computer interpolates from there. That really isn't a bad calibration, and I'd be surprised if other modern rigs were much different. Now it is quite likely that there is some dependence on the AGC voltage with frequency, but again, in a modern rig that should be manageable. What isn't so constant, of course, is the antenna. The voltage at the receiver could range over several orders of magnitude for the same signal depending on the antenna. So in terms of providing input to the sender, the S meter reading is still of limited usefulness, even if we all had calibrated radios and agreed that S9=50uv. ... |
The 756 pro is "properly" calibrated, each S-Point is individually
calibrated. Sam "xpyttl" wrote in message ... "Reg Edwards" wrote in message ... Most people appear to be fatally attempting to use, in reverse, their favourite S-meter as a means of calibrating the Standard. No wonder we have so many different standards around. We have seen a dozen or so posters indicate that S9=50uv Nowadays, very few rigs have analog meters. Instead, they have a computer that can take that AGC voltage and display it however the computer decides. In the Icom calibration procedure for the 706, there are three calibration points known by the computer ... S0 (0 uv), S9 (50 uv), and S9+60 (50 mv). The calibration procedure sets these three with known inputs, and presumably the computer interpolates from there. That really isn't a bad calibration, and I'd be surprised if other modern rigs were much different. Now it is quite likely that there is some dependence on the AGC voltage with frequency, but again, in a modern rig that should be manageable. What isn't so constant, of course, is the antenna. The voltage at the receiver could range over several orders of magnitude for the same signal depending on the antenna. So in terms of providing input to the sender, the S meter reading is still of limited usefulness, even if we all had calibrated radios and agreed that S9=50uv. .. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 25/11/2004 |
Ralph Mowery wrote:
"Ken Scharf" wrote in message ... On HF there is no need for an S-meter standard because it seems to be the rule to give report 59. If you don't you soon have a bad reputation of giving wrong reports A signal doesn't have to be S9 to be heard 5 by 9. I would usually tell the guy on the other end what the S meter read, and also how readable he was. When the band is quiet QRN wise, I could honestly give a 59 report to someone hardly moving the meter. OTOH with heavy QRM+QRN someone could be pumping 30db over and still be a rough copy. Then you are still passing out wrong signal reports. The first one would be something like 5 x 2 or 5 x 3 and the second one would be 2 x 9 or 3 x 9. The first number is how well you can understand what is being said and the second is how strong the signal is. If you mean the actual strenth of the signal in uv at the antenna, then you are correct. If you mean the strength of the signal in your EARS that's another story. One is an actual measurement, the other is subjective. (How would you measure signal strength if you were using a receiver without an s meter, such as an old SW3?) |
Then you are still passing out wrong signal reports. The first one would be something like 5 x 2 or 5 x 3 and the second one would be 2 x 9 or 3 x 9. The first number is how well you can understand what is being said and the second is how strong the signal is. If you mean the actual strenth of the signal in uv at the antenna, then you are correct. If you mean the strength of the signal in your EARS that's another story. One is an actual measurement, the other is subjective. (How would you measure signal strength if you were using a receiver without an s meter, such as an old SW3?) I don't mean a thing. If you take some time and review the RS(T) system you would see how it works. The first number is how well you understand what is being said from just catching a few words to understanding everything. The second is the strength of the signal. As the SW3 does not have an AVC system you may be able to judge the strength by how far up you have to turn the volume control for a certain loudness in your ears. |
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:05:46 -0600, "William E. Sabin"
wrote: "William E. Sabin" wrote in message ... "Avery Fineman" wrote in message ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. My homebrew solid state receiver (see QRZ.COM) uses 5 dB per S-unit. S9 corresponds to -73 dBm available power, which is 100 microvolts open-circuit from a 50 ohm sig gen, or 50 microvolts into a 50 ohm load. Available power and open-circuit voltage are used because the input inpedance of the receiver is not guaranteed to be 50 ohms. I use 5 dB per S unit because it compresses the scale a little and it also agrees more closely with the intuitive listening test measure that I have used for many years. The upper end of the scale is 30 dB above S9, which is -43 dBm, a very strong signal. Signals stronger than S9+30 dB I don't bother to measure. At S1 the signal level is -73 - 40 = -113 dBm. Signals weaker than that S1 I don't try to quantify. My receiver has a low noise RF preamp with 8 dB of gain that I use on the 12 and 10 meter bands, when those bands are quiet. This makes the S meter less accurate but I don't worry about that. To get an S meter reading I turn off the preamp briefly. My receiver has a custom made, computer printed scale using a calibrated sig gen, and there are two trimpot adjustments, one for the low end and one for the high end. This circuit uses voltage regulated opamps. The S meter dynamics are adjusted using RC time constants. My S meter is accurate within +/- 2 dB from 160 M to 10 M, because the receiver is designed for this accuracy. Because of the IF and RF circuit design, the scale calibration is fairly correct and reliable, as I mentioned. Bill W0IYH My receiver also has a 20 dB antenna input attenuator that can be switched in from the front panel. This extends the upper signal range to S9 + 50 dB. I use it very rarely. Bill W0IYH defining the proper time-constant for ssb is another problem. My activity has mainly been VHF/UHF cw and ssb, and working a few HF contests on cw. Found that reporting and operational style is somewhat different on HF and VHF. While the normal report on HF is 59 or 599, it varies much more on VHF, and 519 report is not rare on VHF - particularly if the OP has no experience from HF. My favourite report is 559, because it is easy to send using elbug, and it makes some fun, particularly when everybody expects to receive a 599 report, so the opposite OP must make a note in his log that the report wasn't the usual type, and somebody most likely may loose score 73 Jan-Martin, LA8AK --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
defining the proper time-constant for ssb is another problem. My activity has mainly been VHF/UHF cw and ssb, and working a few HF contests on cw. Found that reporting and operational style is somewhat different on HF and VHF. While the normal report on HF is 59 or 599, it varies much more on VHF, and 519 report is not rare on VHF - particularly if the OP has no experience from HF. My favourite report is 559, because it is easy to send using elbug, and it makes some fun, particularly when everybody expects to receive a 599 report, so the opposite OP must make a note in his log that the report wasn't the usual type, and somebody most likely may loose score 73 Jan-Martin, LA8AK Now we are getting to my bands of operating. Instead of the RS(T) type of reports grid squares are usually used on VHF. That eliminates the bogus 599 type of reports and while probably never used it will give a rough check to see if you actually copied the call correct as the grids can be compaired to the other stations that worked the same call .. |
S-meters are nothing else but power (input) meters. Amateurs and meter manufacturers long ago learned, that when giving signal strength reports, it is more convenient to refer to meter indications in terms of S-units rather than micro-watts or nano-watts. At HF, when the meter reads S-9 the power entering the receiver is 50 pico-watts. There's a slight complication above S-9 when the meter scale changes to decibels above S-9. When the reading is S-9 plus 40 dB the meter is actually indicating about S-16. It's just a matter of scale graduations and printing. The S-meter does NOT measure or even indicate field strength. It indicates nothing except that an increase in meter reading corresponds to an increase in field strength. Which may be nice to know but by how much of an increase is anybody's guess. Measured field strength depends on the type of antenna, its efficiency, ground losses, etc. It is possible, of course, to calculate field strength in the vicinity of the antenna from S-meter readings provided the antenna, its directivity, transmission line, tuner and ground characteristics are all known numerically. Which in the amateur situation they are seldom not! Or even in the professional situation. You've all got one. To repeat - the S-meter is a power (input) meter. ---- Reg, G4FGQ |
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:46:11 GMT, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote: defining the proper time-constant for ssb is another problem. My activity has mainly been VHF/UHF cw and ssb, and working a few HF contests on cw. Found that reporting and operational style is somewhat different on HF and VHF. While the normal report on HF is 59 or 599, it varies much more on VHF, and 519 report is not rare on VHF - particularly if the OP has no experience from HF. My favourite report is 559, because it is easy to send using elbug, and it makes some fun, particularly when everybody expects to receive a 599 report, so the opposite OP must make a note in his log that the report wasn't the usual type, and somebody most likely may loose score 73 Jan-Martin, LA8AK Now we are getting to my bands of operating. Instead of the RS(T) type of reports grid squares are usually used on VHF. That eliminates the bogus 599 type of reports and while probably never used it will give a rough check to see if you actually copied the call correct as the grids can be compaired to the other stations that worked the same call . the most used report on this side would be 55A in JO38XC or if you insist on the QTH-loc it is DS80B Somebody ask for QRA, and I believe QRA means "name of the station" --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
http://www.n6rk.com/S_unit_definitions.doc
"Avery Fineman" wrote in message ... Is there a standard RF input level per "S" Unit? If so, please post the location. Thanks. |
Now we are getting to my bands of operating. Instead of the RS(T) type of
reports grid squares are usually used on VHF. That eliminates the bogus 599 type of reports and while probably never used it will give a rough check to see if you actually copied the call correct as the grids can be compaired to the other stations that worked the same call ================= You are riding my hobby horse. I find the obligatory 599 or 59 report absolute nonsense , if not stupid , especially in connection with contests ,because it does not provide 'any information' . Instead one could be required (also on HF) to report the IARU locator like for example IO87AT followed by a serial number. However this would no doubt cause havoc among the 'mega-scorers' since it would be much harder to copy instead of the fixed 599 or 59 , resulting in a lower score. Although a computer database could link a callsign to the IARU locator ,this would be more difficult, if not impossible,during a field day or similar event. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
There has been a de-facto HF standard for 60 years.
The USA military first used it in specifications of radio equipment when placing contracts with manufacturers around the end of WW2. There may have been some restrictions on publicity at the time. The Standard is 6 dB per S-unit and 50 micro-volts into 50 ohms at S=9. ======================= I have read somewhere that it was Art Collins , of Collins Radio fame ,who first mooted/established the above standard for up to 30 MHz. Much later ,among radio amateurs, the S9 signal level for freqs above 30 MHz was set at 5 microvolts into 50 Ohms . Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
I find the obligatory 599 or 59 report absolute nonsense , if not stupid ,
especially in connection with contests ,because it does not provide 'any information' . So, like you want me to sit at the rig with magnifying glass and observe the meter with 5% accuracy? Reports became largely redundant, most people chose to 59 them, but nobody is stopping you from using accurate report. It just became more important in the contest to work as many as possible, fast, rather than do scientific reporting on signals. The other purpose is to alert the recipient that the other part of exchange is coming. Most established contests are using signal reports (old requirement for DXCC QSOs). Some newer ones and VHF are not. Check http://www.computeradio.us/TeslaCup.htm for really fair and modern HF contest rules. 73 and 599 Yuri, K3BU.us |
The reason for the 59 or 599 is contesters don't want to waste time with
lesser reports so they always give 59 or 599 and their computers are programmed for 59 or 599 Paper loggers just enter 59 or 599 in one entry and draw a line thru the column Time is of the essence in a contest This practice altho wrong has been going on for years and undoubtedly will continue And a contester is not after RST information per se but must satisfy the rules -- just quick rapid contacts is the drill Q-Rate me lads Q-Rate -- ruido de icógnito Someone wrote I find the obligatory 599 or 59 report absolute nonsense , if not stupid , especially in connection with contests ,because it does not provide 'any information' . |
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
I find the obligatory 599 or 59 report absolute nonsense , if not stupid , especially in connection with contests ,because it does not provide 'any information' . So, like you want me to sit at the rig with magnifying glass and observe the meter with 5% accuracy? Reports became largely redundant, most people chose to 59 them, but nobody is stopping you from using accurate report. . . It's lots of fun to jump into a DX contest for a while and give honest RST reports. Totally blows the other guy's mind. I suspect most can't even figure out a way to log it. I'm sure Yuri would get a big kick out of folks doing that to him during a hot contest. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:02:27 -0800, Noise From Afar hath writ:
The reason for the 59 or 599 is contesters don't want to waste time with lesser reports so they always give 59 or 599 and their computers are programmed for 59 or 599 Paper loggers just enter 59 or 599 in one entry and draw a line thru the column Time is of the essence in a contest This practice altho wrong has been going on for years and undoubtedly will continue And a contester is not after RST information per se but must satisfy the rules -- just quick rapid contacts is the drill Q-Rate me lads Q-Rate That's whay (as an earlier poster in the thread mentioned) VHF contests are more honest. The exchange has to be the (correct) grid square. Thus, the contest judges have a excellent way to locate mis-matched calls:grids. 73 Jonesy -- | Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux | Gunnison, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | OS/2 __ | 7,703' -- 2,345m | config.com | DM68mn SK |
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:02:27 -0800, "Noise From Afar"
wrote: The reason for the 59 or 599 is contesters don't want to waste time with lesser reports so they always give 59 or 599 and their computers are programmed for 59 or 599 Paper loggers just enter 59 or 599 in one entry and draw a line thru the column that is bad logging practice, you write 5 for 559, 7 for 579, and leave open for 599 with 25WPM it is no real problem on this side --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
"Noise From Afar" wrote in message news:7zord.190863$hj.186448@fed1read07... The reason for the 59 or 599 is contesters don't want to waste time with lesser reports so they always give 59 or 599 and their computers are programmed for 59 or 599 Paper loggers just enter 59 or 599 in one entry and draw a line thru the column Time is of the essence in a contest This practice altho wrong has been going on for years and undoubtedly will continue And a contester is not after RST information per se but must satisfy the rules -- just quick rapid contacts is the drill Q-Rate me lads Q-Rate AS time and the Q rate is important and everyone is going 599, why don't the contest rules just do away with that requirement ? What good is it ? |
It's lots of fun to jump into a DX contest for a while and give honest RST reports. Totally blows the other guy's mind. I suspect most can't even figure out a way to log it. I'm sure Yuri would get a big kick out of folks doing that to him during a hot contest. Roy Lewallen, W7EL No problem, just one more keystroke, unless one has jumped the gun, assumed 599 and logged the QSO before the other station sent the real report. Then it is few more keystrokes :-( Yuri, K3BU.us |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com