Why 3.0 swr?

[scanmanmi]

I ran across this solicitation spec for an antenna with an SWR of 2.5 but preferred 3.0. Why?
Army vetronics experts reach out to industry for rugged RF antennas for military vehicles | Military & Aerospace Electronics

 

[KB4MSZ]

My guess on this is that the antennas should maintain their gain and bandwidth specs up to 2.5 SWR, but 3.0 preferred. This would help ensure that the rough environment they will no doubt operate in won't degrade their performance too far from spec.

 

[prcguy]

I read the article as having a mistake, it should read a maximum of 3:1 but 2.5:1 is preferred.

 

[N4GIX]

Gee, they don't want much do they?

 

[Ubbe]

Prcguy are correct, they "translated" the original document:

VSWR: Maximum 2.5:1 (Objective), 3.0:1 (Threshold)

/Ubbe

 

[W5lz]

I think the 'problem' is in how the thing is stated. I honestly can't imagine anyone wanting a 3:1 SWR if it's possible to get it lower, so I think that 3:1 is a maximum limit?

 

[prcguy]

Modern VHF/UHF military radios and antennas are very wide band and sometimes for frequency hopping or some other mode that needs instantaneous band width. Most modern military radios are designed to work into a 3:1 mismatch and that is a common spec these days for military antennas.

I think the 'problem' is in how the thing is stated. I honestly can't imagine anyone wanting a 3:1 SWR if it's possible to get it lower, so I think that 3:1 is a maximum limit?