Bob,
I sure do think my Orion II s meter is way off after S-9 especially...is that
normal for them?
Maybe I should actually see what it is with the 8640B sig gen.
73,
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob McGraw - K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.net>
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Mon, May 21, 2012 8:13 am
Subject: [TenTec] Receiver S meter values
I seem to believe that most companies accept 50 uV or -73 dBm at the
eceiver input as the referenced signal strength for an S 9 meter
ndication. Moving up or down the scale, again most seem to agree that one
unit is equal to a 6 dB change in signal strength. Some earlier thoughts,
ollins for example, used 100 uV for S 9 in many of their receivers.
Starting with S -0 {what ever that might be} we find that 0.10 uV or -127
Bm is a starting point. Then S 1 would be 0.20 uV or -121 dBm being 6 dB
reater. The scale moves up accordingly. Do note that these are electrical
alues and your S meter indication may be different.
73
ob, K4TAX
---- Original Message -----
rom: "GARY HUBER" <glhuber@msn.com>
o: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
ent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 8:17 PM
ubject: Re: [TenTec] Omni VII Filters
Bob,
You probably have the correct S-meter reading calculations..... I used to
work with the commercial radio technicians and engineers (I was neither)
who
did all their signal level (power) calculations referenced to a milli-watt
(0.001 W). I found that it was pretty easy calculate path losses or signal
power levels once I understood the formula.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBm dBm (sometimes dBmW) is an
abbreviation for the power ratio in decibels (dB) of the measured power
referenced to one milliwatt (mW).
73 ES DX,
Gary -- AB9M
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob McGraw - K4TAX
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 7:18 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni VII Filters
If I did the math correct, Gary's reference to dBm would be, for -30 dBm
is
about S-9 +43 dB, and for -10 dBM would be S-9 +60 dB or so. Nice strong
signals I'd say.
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "GARY HUBER" <glhuber@msn.com>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni VII Filters
> The OMNI-VII disadvantage MAY have a lot to do with the RF gain setting
> of
> the OMNI-VII and the PAs and transmitted signals of TX A, B, C, ....
> Our local club has for years had many and often heated discussions over
> the
> CW, SSB, or Digital station being heard by the others on different bands.
> The one exception was the year we ran three OMNI-VI+ for FD.
>
> With my OMNI-VII, I have both the 300 and 500 Hz filters installed and
> seldom notice my neighbors AC9S and AA9LC unless they are within the
> OMNI-VII's passband. AC9S is very active in both DXing and Contesting
> with
> an ORION-II, Alpha amp and SteppIR beam. We both typically run our TenTec
> transceivers with minimum RF gain and have found we can co-exist on the
> same
> band and mode as long as we avoid transmitting within 3 KHz of each
> other.
> Typical signal levels received on my OMNI-VII (and Flex-1500 sub-rx) from
> AC9S are -30 to -10 dBm depending on the frequency and the antenna used.
>
> 73 ES DX,
> Gary -- AB9M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richards
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:14 PM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment of each Subject: Re: [TenTec] Omni
> VII
> Filters
>
>
>
> On 5/16/2012 8:58 AM, Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP wrote:
>
>> The one place where the OM7 will be at a disadvantage is if you are
>> trying
>> to use it at a multi-multi station where you have at least 6 max legal
>> power
>> stations on the air simultaneously from a location the size of a
>> football
>> field,
>
>
> I disagree based on experience. We run 2
> Omni VIIs, an Orion II, an Omni VI, all in the same
> room, and it is someone using a K3s that complain !
> For some contests, the phone guys are in one place,
> and the CW guys are 300 yards away on a big hill
> in a field and the guys with the Elecraft gear complain
> about intermod, not the TT guys. (I hope this does NOT
> start a sub-thread about TT v Elecraft...)
>
> Of course you gotta use passband filters, and stay off
> the same antenna ... ;-) ... but I have NEVER
> had intermod, interference, of any RF on my anything
> under such extreme conditions.
>
> Shoot, Rick... it might be better than you think ! ;-)
>
>
>
>> Don't tell anyone I said this, but I even like it a wee bit better than
>> my
>> Eagle, but the Eagle has other advantages - size, weight, and
>> simplicity.
>
>
> YES - The design team at TenTec obviously thought
> about what to put on the Eagle and what not to ...
> trying not to obsolete any of the other products in
> the line. I prefer the Omni VII over the Eagle because
> it has more stuff on it... such as a receive only
> antenna jack, two transceive antenna jacks, etc.,
> but the Eagle presents a high performance option,
> at a lower price for guys who don't want all that
> extra jazz.
>
> I have considered using an Eagle as a "second receiver"
> for the Omni VII, and letting Carl's N4PY Pegasus
> control program integrate the two as one - so I could
> use the band scope display for the Eagle to work as
> a panadatper for the Omni VII - click on it scope, and
> both rigs tune to the same frequency. Cool. I use
> a TT RX-320D for that now, but the Eagle would be
> way better I think.
>
>
> One of our Lunch Bunch guys is older than the sun,
> and sometimes talks about getting out of ham radio
> because it seems to be getting too complicated for
> him -- so I keep recommending the Eagle because I
> think it would be a huge performer, but a much
> easier rig to run than the rest of the crop. He could
> easily take it to Florida when he goes down for the
> Winter. Stubborn old coot... but he is a great guy!
> ;-)
>
>
>> *The exception would only be a top notch 160m operator with great
>> antennas
>> in a 160m contest. The rest of the time, the rest of the contests, the
>> operator makes far more difference that the tiny bit of difference in
>> the
>> radios.
>
>
> We used an Omni VII to work the CQ WW
> contest... and came in 1st in Michigan... 1st in
> Section 8... Fifth in US... 7th in North America...
> and the only guys to beat us were all on the East
> Coast with a slightly better shot at EU multipliers.
> So, I am not worried about using the Omni VII in
> a 160 meter contest.
>
>
>
>> In my books, the Omni VII is the best all-around radio on the planet
>> today
>> for 98% of all hams.
>
>
> That might be a slight exaggeration... the real
> figures is closer to 95% of all hams... ;-)
>
>
>
> ====================== JHR =======================
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
______________________________________________
enTec mailing list
enTec@contesting.com
ttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|