Bells cb and why...

What test equipment did you use to formulate that conclusion or was that just an opinion? Keep in mind, your noise floor would have been at least twice as high, so you wouldn't have been able to hear the guy in Colorado.

 

The receiver that can hear the weakest signal is the best receiver.
The transmitter that can transmit the farthest with the least amount of power has the most efficient signal.
Skip doesn't count unless you have a scientific way of measuring the signal strength of the incoming signal.

 

Let me have a go.
It's late as in VERY late and I feel like taking the piss out of him.
Full disclosure: I don't drive a lorry.

I love this bollocks about "most efficient signal" and not having it quantified.

Tell me mr chops what is the noise floor? Tell me how you measured it and what the result was.
Be precise! We know how you love precision mate.

It's almost 0100 and I am on holiday. I have time.

 

I expect him to ring his mate in the caravan and start calling me names instead of answer the question.
However, I would like to give him the benefit of a doubt on that.

 

Let me explain something to you chaps as well about my "best mate" rabbi pork chops.

The first bit is that they have lost the plot. They don't give a toss because at the end of the day you are being judged by a chap that drives a lorry.
( and I mean no offence to lorry drivers - I just don't tell you chaps how to drive them as I know nothing about it )

All the bollocks about the signal sweeping and watching amplitude to see what the frequency response of the radio is when THERE IS A BETTER, FASTER, AND MORE VISUALLY INTUITIVE WAY... than using a bloody oscilloscope because you cannot see some of the minor variations on that oscilloscope. The CDMA test set these chaps use might do it. I worked out that this is done intentionally as part of obfuscation because why would you not use a method that is easier to see, explain, and show!

You lot *will never* get this chap to concede on any point. NEVER.
If he gets caught on something or backed into a corner he will throw out some bollocks like you being too stupid to know you are stupid or that you have no "integrity" or "ethics".
(Read the article in the 90s in the times when I worked in NY. It is to the dismay of the writers of the paper that it is often misquoted and misapplied by chaps like rabbi chops.)

He might throw some ethnic slur like "shyster" out.
He might sod off for a week or two to let it settle down then come back for another go.
It will always come down to "my reality" vs yours.
In other words you are allowing yourself to be judged by some chap in a caravan by proxy.

You will ALWAYS be wrong. Basic maths disprove half their bollocks. But those maths are wrong because they say so. "the real world" is a fairly convenient escape, too. Only they can quantify it.

It will be a bloody litany of excuses nothing more.

​

 

I'm surprised you came out of your medical billing office to bless us with your presence. Welcome to the forum.
My noise floor and yours are two different things. Most of your noise is generated within your system and is easily eliminated if your pal Mike would be willing to learn a couple things. Alas, when Mark tried to offer Mike some pointers over the phone, Mike kept rambling on as if he knew everything and there was nothing left for him to learn. It's slightly difficult to have a rational conversation with some folks due to the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Try .0399uv under laboratory conditions.
I'm sure you noticed I hear voices through my speaker that don't register on the meter. It's not an accident. Perhaps your pal Mike could show us something similar since he can't even produce a perfect waveform on a simple Cobra 138. Distortion is a funny thing, especially when I have none from 150hz to 5000hz. That's impossible to achieve with mismatched FPQ13N10 transistors by the way. I know how much you love those things.
Have fun on your blog.. Your buddy cracks me up. Can't even get a Cobra 138 dialed in and claims to be some sort of "guru"