To: | topband@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: Skimmer calibration |
From: | Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com> |
Date: | Mon, 18 Aug 2014 12:22:56 -0400 |
List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
It's also worth mentioning that you can evade the Skimmer's "wait 10
minutes before re-spotting" limitation simply by QSYing 500 Hz or
sobefore re-sending - that way you can get a lot of data points in a
relatively short period. So long as you use TEST as your keyword rather
than CQ, and stay out of other people's way, nobody should be upset.
73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com. For spots, please go to your favorite ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node. On 8/18/2014 12:16 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: This is why some time and multiple skimmers must be involved in the statistics................otherwise data doesn't mean much.Without skimmer I never settled on antennas until many dozens of blind AB test reports. I think skimmer is a more accurate way, because the human at the RX end is out of the picture.There's a lot of scatter in the dB measurements from skimmers. If I seedozens of spots graphed on the reversebeacon "spots comparison tool" then Ican believe systemic differences like 3-5dB. But I could never draw that conclusion over a single pair of spots. Any given skimmer will spot a given station on a given frequency at most once every ten minutes. But when the geographic density of skimmers islarge enough (e.g. East coast US or Western Europe) just raw quantities orbreadth of spots starts being more interesting than exact dB level. Evenwith the paucity of skimmers on west coast of US, I can still see who has a4-square for transmit and how they steer it during the contest. Tim N3QE On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com> wrote:I am not a Skimmer expert, and am just asking. Question: Are all theSkimmers individually(and collectively) calibrated in concert? Can one rely on them for comparing scientific data and conclusion to prove or ascertaina point?Val>>>> Val, A live comparison of S/N ratio or relative level over time is with veryfew exceptions an excellent comparative test. It is much more accurate than S meters or absolute levels without a comparison reference. As such, theRBN is a great tool for evaluating systems. The problems are:1.) For determining small differences, less than around 5 dB, you have to know the performance level of the reference antenna or station. (For thatreason, I use a simple dipole reference.)2.) The reference and AUT (antenna under test) have to be reasonably closetogether to eliminate propagation variances, but not so close as to interact, and they have to be in the clear. For example, it would befoolish for me to plant a dipole in the middle of a bunch of Yagi antennasand call it a reference, or put the antenna being evaluated in an obstructed area.3.) On skywave, there has to be some time involved with readings averaged over time. This is somewhat true if there is more than a few wavelengthsdistance between antennas, and especially true (almost critical) when comparing different polarization antennas.4.) Ideally the reference and AUT should be the same polarization, unlesswe simply want to know which is louder overall.5.) Antennas have sweet and sour heights for a given set of conditions. We have to be very careful of this. This is especially true when antennas are more than a half wavelength high above ground, because the antenna pattern will be a series of deep nulls that selectively "notch out" a given waveangle. The RBN is an excellent tool. It does not need to be calibrated inabsolute level, only in dB, and dB to noise is just fine provided the noiselevel of the receive site is steady. One thing I hope we all can do is stop acting so "American" (we are now what, 30th or 40th in math and science?) and get back to constructiveexchanges of information. If we stop learning and just pick a position and fight, which is our trend today, this becomes a useless hobby and there isno reason to communicate. 73 Tom _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.comVersion: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8057 - Release Date: 08/18/14_________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband |
Previous by Date: | Re: Topband: Skimmer calibration, Tom W8JI |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Topband: Skimmer calibration, Jim Brown |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: Skimmer calibration, Tom W8JI |
Next by Thread: | Re: Topband: Skimmer calibration, Jim Brown |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |