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' .