Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:57:37 +0100
Message-Id: <993182564@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: di2am@web.de
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Organization: http://freemail.web.de/
Subject: Re: LF: "Gain" between qrss3 and qrss10?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Dear all,


> Von: "Stefan Sch=E4fer" <schaefer@hst.tu-darmstadt.de>

> If the "gain" or better said SNR between qrss30 and qrss3 is 10dB, so=20
> can I do a QSO to VK with 1W TX Power and an antenna efficiency of 1/
> 1000 if I choose QRSS10000000000? That=92s a litte jokingly=20
> formulated but you know what I mean. In other words, where are the=20
> limitations of this rule?=20

The variability of the channel properties and your life expectancy  (hi)

...

> What is the maximum power that is applied to an antenna yet? What=20
> have you heard yet? I have applied 1kW in a bad antenna (=3D> abt 100mW=
=20
> ERP), so 10kW would be possible when considering to stay in the legal=20
> limit. 10kW would be possible since one doesn't need a ferrite core=20
> that has to keep the power (in Class E mode). In USA it would be even=20
> more easy due to the fact that the 110V of the mains could just be=20
> rectified. Then I would take some STW12NK90Zin parallel and a=20
> IXDD414and try it with 15A antenna current ;-)
> Sorry, but in that hobby it is really easy to become euphoric=85

You've nicely demonstrated the nonsense of the 1W ERP legal limit regs.
The 200 W TX output on LF and 100 W TX output on MF the norwegian
authorities permitted seem to be by far more reasonable to me.

73
Joerg, DL3NRV