Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: LF: RE: QRP

from [Roger Lapthorn] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: RE: QRP
From: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 12:42:35 +0100
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=afhQZtfEzM3wbkP13OCwbR8tEQPMt/ZpW7RgzuuqEko=; b=RmYbtAPQGMh6n1WKkmEz8XgYBrDU4aLXFqvvPmPXS7caT4Nq4kWVp2QYYS8Up1+1/V py5+sMEsFfn7yr8BqWJnor1+2Pk1k+wfzCUC591okG4KMoW3PoI/x/mB5IUC/dIRjE1e 4wvlrEsggMdQ5lR2IOgSaOEg95q9lfvGiOTGU=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=UPX0plWYINwBx0F+iyjSK+w/eihtdjAPBe8tP4BzFXzPolLb9yOHM4WMM73IIuonIt 3VHZb3lac/NMg9jzsmAWKi4Gp7OS7Oy6pT8xlxl1UsuZAzl2D7dUh+HgP3Wpd6Q2pS2R aB07xO4rrfB8KTR4LUaUYmrs0ljQTK4MZz/+s=
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
In-reply-to: <000001cb017b$c56e81b0$0202a8c0@laptopcore2>
References: <9B1ACF98A3384489B37FABB5028106E9@IBM7FFA209F07C> <000001cb017b$c56e81b0$0202a8c0@laptopcore2>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
There is a time and a place for both QRO and QRP.
  • QRO is useful to "extend possibilities" by exploiting new modes of propagation or when lower power simply wouldn't be enough e.g. moon bounce on UHF, scatter modes on microwaves, or frontier DX work on 8.97kHz.
  • QRP time and again proves to me that, in very many situations, high power is both a waste of time and energy. On HF a few watts (even handheld) is enough to work the world on SSB as well as CW, even in sunspot minimum years. It just takes a little more effort and skill both on the part of the TXing station and on the RXing station. On MF last winter 1mW ERP was enough to achieve far more than I could have wished for and I appreciated the efforts made by many to detect my weak signals, including Mal working me on CW.
QRP is a personal choice and it has been my personal interest for most of my ham operating life: it is fun, gear is simple and inexpensive to make, TVI is never an issue and energy requirements are minimal. It is not for everyone and I respect that, but I do commend it.

73s
Roger G3XBM


On 1 June 2010 12:15, g3zjo <[email protected]> wrote:

>Absolutely CORRECT Mal, I totally agree.

>Chris, G4AYT.

 

            I don’t want to join in with any tit for tat stuff, please don’t lets go there.

 

Mal has very good antennas I am sure he can receive my 500kHz QRPp signal although he has never admitted it.

Lee M0LMH, the Bloodhound, certainly can at 194km 120miles under flat conditions; he can also set up a Grabber and display my signal.

 

So lets draw a circle 120miles radius from IO92ng. Any station within that circle should be able to receive my signal too, given a not too fantastic set up, I think Lee has described his set up in that way. If they can’t, then their Receiver or Antenna could be improved and also enable them to receive signals from, say the Czech Republic.

 

Would me increasing my power until I can be seen on the Broad Band Grabbers improve the performance of their set up, because now they would most likely receive me. Or does QRO cover for mediocre RX and Antennas.

 

A stupid question but no worse than some of the prior ‘Stupid Criminals’ posts.

 

Eddie G3ZJO

 

 

           




--
http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  LF: RE: QRP, g3zjo
Next by Date:  LF: QRO / QRP, Mike Dennison
Previous by Thread:  LF: RE: QRP, g3zjo
Next by Thread:  R: LF: RE: QRP, daniele.tincani
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]