The Standard of the Industry Wattmeter, Bird 43 with Jim W6LG
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лют 2024
- Here's a quick look at the Bird 43 wattmeter. For nearly 70 years, the Bird 43 Wattmeter has been and remains the standard of the industry. You can see more about this vintage device on their website Birdrf.com. There are usually lots of them for sale on Ebay along with the various slugs. Slugs are inserts that determine the power level and frequency.
- Наука та технологія
Great meters because they are robust. Only problem is people make them out to be more than they are. People seem to think they are super accurate, they are not. They have a accuracy of +/-5%. Perfect for field use. If you want precision then get a RF power meter and appropriately sized attenuator to stick in front of the sensor. Then you can get around .01db accuracy.
You bet. All true. 73, Jim W6LG
Thanks, Jim. I enjoyed your presentation. I've used my Bird 43 for HF for many years. I first started using one while in the Navy as an ET aboard a guided missile destroyer. Those meters are built to last! I recently began putting an EME station together which made me realize what a diverse range of frequencies the 43's various slugs help provide measurements for. 73 de KA1WHT.
Hi Jim, Bill; AC8AQ here. In the 1980's and 1990's in the development of HF power amps for Collins Radio, we naturally used a lot of the model 43s and its variations. The design is about 70 years old; consisting of a directional coupler, detector, and sensitive D'Arsonval meter movement. They are rugged, well made, and reasonably accurate for general measurements. Accuracy is +/- 5% for the basic model 93 and +/- 7% for the peak reading model.
It wasn't accurate enough for our testing requirements so, at that time, we used the HP-410C AC probe with a type N line sniffer, for reading HF PA PEP, which got us down to 2 to 3% accuracy.
As usual, you gave us some very solid, good information Bill. Thank you! 73, Jim W6LG
Thank you, again, Jim...I have the Model 43, with three HF slugs, in my shack. Very dependable instrument. Always appreciate your informative Y-T clips. 73, Tom
I made a living as a mobile FM radio technician. The Bird 43 watt meter with slugs for UHF and VHF was standard bench and field equipment. There were three repeater sites numerous base stations and optical camera sites with radios. We also serviced the GE HN series hand held portables (not HT's). One thing worth mentioning is the use of a much lower power slug in the reversed position to measure SWR. Using the slug rated for the output power of your transceiver, check how much SWR is present, then trim the antenna for minimum SWR on the low power slug if the power is below the range of the slug. We trimmed our antennas for max output and lowest SWR, many times obtaining values below a couple of Watts for a hundred forward power. I love your content Jim and I hope to become active again. I recently let my license expire but am legal again. I'm a Technician + operator. I'm hoping to get on the air on 6 and 10 meters. You have a great looking shack Jim! I'll keep checking in with you.
73's de KB5ZDW
Lovely meters Jim. I picked up a Bird 43 in absolute mint 10+ condition for €200 + the leather case, am I pleased or what 😎 I also have a Telewave meter in the same pristine condition. Both are superb meters and a pleasure to use.
73 de Ger
Howdy Jim. Always enjoy your posts, thank you!
Hey, thanks. 73, Jim
When I worked in two-way, I had the Bird with the attachable 100W dummy load. Thanks for the great refresher from N8CA.
Enjoyed this video. 73 from K2CDM
The Bird is the word.
Love my Bird 43s, multiple… including one with peak reading and the goodies like the signal injection slug.
Also have one outfitted with UHF connectors and one with N connectors.
And the cases. And …
But if I were buying today I’d get the Telewave with switch selectable bands. Far more economical and identical design.
The slugs are outdated tech. Fine for us old farts that already have them, but not worth hunting down for all bands today.
Good video, Jim. Cheers.
Hi Jim ... great to hear you !!!
yoiu should remind us that accuracy is 5% of FULL SCALE, so having the right slug is a GREAT IDEA to get meaningful results. I gave up on the slugs about 25 years ago and got an LP-100. Maybe not the choice for mobile & VHF work, butr for HF has too many features to pass up. and 2% (. MHO )... stay feeling well !!!!!
Several have talked about the 5% of full scale as indicated on the Bird website. Over time, I have compared the two wattmeters with various slugs. Sometimes I have duplicate slugs and get the same answer. So I have grown to accept the meter reading as the correct number of watts. 73, Jim W6LG
What great piece of test equipment! And it's so easy to use! Thanks for sharing! I have many great memories using the Bird Thru-Line Watt meters as a tech in the military and FAA. 73's!!!
Rugged and useful in many applications. 73, Jim
Hi Jim, they are certainly still an industry standard, the accuracy is at it's best close to full scale where they claim +/- 5% but they are affected by temperature. There are a number of variants, some with a port for RF sampling, some with the PEP module ready installed, there is also a version with a wideband element and a range selector switch. The 43 does have interchangeable connectors, but for my purposes I stick with N-sockets and use adaptors if needed. I have a number of them, they tend to be trustworthy instruments within their limitations. Something no-one tends to adhere to is that in transit the element should be rotated so that the arrow is vertical, that way the meter movement is damped by having a short circuit across it. It is wise to have the instruction manual available, some of the HF elements particularly need quite large correction factors applied at low frequencies. (Sorry I know that you mentioned a few of my points) My battered one has the PEP module fitted and is refinished in black Hammerite, handy that it stands out from the others. 73
For sure, they are not perfect. Beyond that, I am surprised that no one has manufactured a better and different device. I am not talking about a copy, but something very different with even greater accuracy that is rugged and portable. Thanks, Jim
I have 2 Bird meters one has Peak reading and one that doesn't (43 & 43P) both are outstanding and look new. I use them when building antennas and checking other watt meters in radios and antenna tuners that have SWR/watt meters.
would love to have one, boy prices soard in last 3 years. Thank you Jim for so much vital info.. You are looking very good in the movies, Sir ! Jerry,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1212 on 11M
You bet they have. The prices are crazy high and just not worth it. 73, Jim
Thanks Jim
Take care, Jim
Interesting stuff as always. I hope you're feeling well, Jim. 73
Thank you. 73, Jim
I often promptly order the products you review positively, but this one exceeds the reach of my wallet. LOL
Mine too. As I said to another guy, I could not afford these meters today. They are crazy expensive. I will hate to part with them but I know at some point that will have to happen. 73, Jim W6LG
Very informative video Jim, many thanks!! I hope you are doing well. Robert K5TPC
I too have 2 of these units. They are excellent meters. Slugs are getting expensive but very accurate meters.
I too am lucky to have two of them. Sometime soon I will have to sell them because of age and illness. 73, Jim W6LG
@@ham-radio I know Jim and I'm sorry sir. I have been praying for you hope for better results on the treatments.
Hello Jim, Hope you are feeling well ..or at least better than last year.
Feelling not good. Spent almost all of today in bed. Chemo again next week. Then again in 4 weeks. Transfusion number 19 was last week. I hope that the new chemo works. 73, Jim W6LG
Bird watt meters are standard. Had a few #43's.
As always Jim thanks n 73
I wondered about that and asked a few broadcast guys and they agreed with you. After all of these years, the Bird is the standard. Absolutely amazing for that to be the case. Thanks, 73, Jim W6LG
Thanks 😊 Jim, Be Well, just two months to being 80.
Anyway, thanks about the Bird 43.
Never had one, just saw one at
a Hamfest recently in Marlboro,
MA.
Yes being licensed since 1962,
I remember them well, as the
standard back then, and still
the best with all the others out
there today.
I remember some years ago,
an oldervamateur, K2BQO, later
K2, licensed in 1952, had, I think
a Bird with a RED led display?
Am I correct? Did it exist.
He had a big station and antennas
on a tower, knew many DX
amateurs, and had RACAL
and HRO receivers.
73 de Ray W2CH New Hampshire. 😊
Gee, I don't know. I am inclined to say no since LED's were not common until the 1970's (I think that is correct). Thanks and 73, Jim W6LG
@ham-radio Hi 👋 Jim. Thanks 😊 Yes it
was later towards 1980. That's when I
remember car stereo's started to be
digital displays, and I had a Yaesu
FT-101ZD hybrid transceiver with a digital
display that was not yet PLL, I guess a
freewheeling oscillator and a bit later
my Yaesu FT?, the Wayfarer was like
that too but in separate units and all
solid state.
I was surprised to hear you say they won't read peak as stock, since all of the serious CB amp sellers on UA-cam switch between average and peak power in their demonstrations of their equipment.
Well, what can I say? I don't watch CB guys because they don't know what they are talking about as supposed experts. It is the same with some ham radio channels where the information presented is so wrong. 73, Jim W6LG
@@ham-radioI notice that those channels have their Bird meters in tandem, one directly hooked to the other. Is there any reason to this?
Really is an unneeded luxury item. A $100 watt meter does a decent enough job in 99% of cases, but if you need the pose value, the Bird fits the bill.
Bird 43 is a pretty rugged piece of test eqyipment, the elements, not so much. If an element is ever dropped, it needs to be calibrated, as the pickup loop inside can move due to shock. The Bird accuracy rating only applies when used in a 50 ohm resistive system, the higher the reflected power, the higher the chance of inacuracy. When using to measure reflected power, always use the appropriate power element, if your forward power is 100 watts, use a 10 watt or higher element, never more than a 10:1 forward to reflected ratio as the diode in the element elelment can be overloaded and again cause inaccurices in the element readings. Properly taken care of, yhey will last many years without service.
Nothing is perfect in the wattmeters. Plus or minus 5% on the their data sheet. I bought them years ago when I had a business. I probably should sell them at some point as my cancer may be getting worse. 73, Jim W6LG
Any chance on seeing a schematic for the peak wattage circuit addition?😊
Bob Runge
W1LSZ
FWIW Bird made a PEP module themselves which inconveniently used 2 9v batteries, there are other aftermarket boards available (I use a few). They tend to be based around an op-amp with a diode in the feedback loop 73
Ya, mine has a single battery. The Bird board was really expensive at the time so I bought the cheaper one. 73, Jim
Never could afford one. I still use my old drake
Ya Jay, and now almost none of us can at the new very high prices. The Drake W4 that I have gives me about the same answer. The Drake meter is very heavily damped so it is slow. 73, Jim W6LG
@@ham-radio thanks Jim. There’s a gentleman that makes a plug in/solder peak reading option for the w4. But I would sure recommend calibration with the bird.
I have to laugh when some CB types refer to it as Bird Watts, etc. I ask if that's different to mammal or fish Watts! 😂
Watts wrong with that QSL QSL? 73, Jim
From what little I know about the CB is that there are some brands of wattmeters that are not very accurate. So to get bragging rights they specify Bird Watts instead of the Dosey watts. Probably spelled that wrong but it is a brand of wattmeters that they say usually shows higher than what it actually is. Part of my job was to calibrate instruments . So I learned what to expect out of them and how accurate they should be. The Bird is a good field instrument and designed to take a lot of abuse, not be super accurate. So if your transmitter is suppose to be a 100 watt unit and the Bird shows form about 90 to 110 watts that is close enough and no one will notice the difference. If it is off much more than that it is time to start looking for a problem either with the equipment or the meter. Sometimes it is good to have 2 meters. Not long ago a friend brought a Bird meter and a transmitter here to check out.
The amp meter on the transmitter said it should be producing power into the dummy load but the Bird showed almost no power. I used my meter and was getting plenty of power. Found out that the terminals on the back of the meter part of the Bird were not making good electrical contact even though they were tight. This Bird had never been used in the field and looked almost new.
There are definitely use cases for using a very expensive Bird directional wattmeter. Almost no amateur radio operator needs a Bird wattmeter. For professional use and transceiver calibration, it is a valuable tool if maintained properly. Other than to larp, I don't know why anyone would spend money on these meters as an amateur radio operator.
Jim, excellent explanation, do you have a email that I can reach out you, thanks
I do. It is at gmail.com. The first part is 5 letters and then 73@. Ham are the first 3 letters followed by CQ as the next two letters. 73, Jim W6LG
@@ham-radio ok, Jim let me try. Thanks
@@ham-radio I just sent a question by email, thanks for coming back to me.
Too much money!
Yes, now I could not buy one. At some point, I will need to sell all of that stuff while I can as the cancer has gotten worse. 73, Jim W6LG
I am sorry to hear that. on the topic of equipment, I prefer a good review with a good price tag. no matter how much money I have I can't force my self to buy more than I need. I guess that is what I have learned through life. I do like the idea of using the slugs. it would add more options to a meter. @@ham-radio
Can we get a round of applause for the creator?