eHam

eHam Forums => QRP => Topic started by: KA0HVE on August 07, 2013, 07:26:16 AM



Title: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA0HVE on August 07, 2013, 07:26:16 AM
Which 2 HF bands would you choose if you had to make a choice?


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KK0G on August 07, 2013, 07:57:28 AM
40 and 20, in fact I've built two QRP rigs and that's exactly what they cover. 30 meters would be a close second choice followed by 80 meters.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA0HVE on August 07, 2013, 08:09:55 AM
I guess that's why so many kits come in your choice of 40 and 20 if there are only 2 choices.

Seems like that would give one the best all around combination but I wanted someone else's view since I'm still new at this.

Thanks Chris!


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W4KYR on August 07, 2013, 08:28:19 AM
40 and 20

There should be a poll for this question, as I would like to see the other choices for #3 and #4 and so on.

A good followup for #3 could be 80 meters for more local contacts at night. Or 30 meters because it falls almost in between the propagation of 40 and 20. Interesting that the YouKits 4 Band has 80, 40, 30, and 20 meters.

Put it to a poll with all the HF bands listed.

Thanks


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AA4PB on August 07, 2013, 09:04:59 AM
40 and 20 because 40 is open to somewhere most of the time and 20 is a good for daytime DX.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: K8AXW on August 07, 2013, 09:50:54 AM
IMO......20, 40 and 80M..... in that order. 

I've never understood why so many QRP rigs are built for the 40M band. (Single band units)  20M will give you more bang for your buck than any other.  (More DX, smaller antenna and the possibility to rotate the 20M antenna)


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W5ESE on August 07, 2013, 09:56:09 AM
There's little opportunity to work other QRPers in your state or region on 20m. And on winter evenings, 20m can be pretty dead.  40m is usually open to somewhere.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W7ASA on August 07, 2013, 10:30:55 AM
40, 20, 30, 80 meters in that order. I like having 30 meters, especially on weekends due to QRM from contests. I enjoy area contacts as much a long distance contacts, so the only reason for my keeping 20m is for my established skeds (which I would rather move to 30m anyway ...)   ;^)

During times of low sun numbers and during the quiet of winter, 80m is a lot of fun on 80m. However, here in The South, T-storms are usually roaring along from mid-day onward through the nights from Spring through late Summer & make 80m very difficult except in the early morning hours.


>de Ray
W7ASA ..._ ._


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KH6AQ on August 07, 2013, 11:24:55 AM
For QRP 40 meters is by far #1. For the second band I would take 20 meters so I could contest otherwise 17 meters.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AK7V on August 07, 2013, 03:54:23 PM
For QRP, I'd say 40, then 30, then 20 and/or 17.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W1JKA on August 08, 2013, 03:58:38 AM
30 meters is now my favorite since I'm finding more foreign Qrp/cw operators on it than my 2nd favorite 20 meter band. So it's 30/20M for me.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AC4RD on August 08, 2013, 04:16:55 AM
So it's 30/20M for me.

That's got my vote, too.  Good combination, if you could only have two bands.

My second choice might be 30 and 17.  :-)


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W1JKA on August 08, 2013, 05:46:30 AM
My next project is a Weber Tri Bander 20/30/40 meters. I've used one more than a few times, just as nice as my K1 which is only 2 bands 20/40m and using SW 30+ for 30m. I think Elecraft missed the boat on the K1 when not including a 3rd band and only option is an additional PITA 2 band module that has to be changed out. 


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: VK7JB on August 09, 2013, 03:48:22 PM
My preferences are:
20m for daylight DX
30m for night time DX, especially in winter
40m for contact within VK. At my QTH, 40m is often very noisy with QRN and when I'm portable, the nature and deployment of my antennas is such that my signal tends to have quite high angle radiation, favoring closer contacts, rather than DX.

30m is becoming my favorite QRP band. It's out of the 20m DX frenzy and I've found that folks often listen there, so very often my QRP CQs are returned, even though the band is seems quiet.
I'm working on QRP DXCC and so far, over half my DX contacts are on 30m.

Cheers
John VK7JB


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KB1GMX on August 09, 2013, 07:24:32 PM
The presumption of QRP is CW...

Leaving that aside if digi modes are used 30 is great.

For non digi modes SSB and 40 and because I prefer it 6M.  Second choices would be 20 and 10m.

40 because its always open to somewhere.

Why 6? because a decent beam is possible in the portable kit and if the location is a high spot
its going to be heard even without Es. 


Allison


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: K1THP on September 07, 2013, 03:54:36 PM
I built a K1 that came with a 4-Band board. The bands were 40, 30, 20 and a choice of 17 or 15. They still sell it that way and the rig rocks! BTW I chose 17 meters.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: N2RRA on September 08, 2013, 02:19:38 AM
I conquer with 40 and 20 which are my very primary choices day and night.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KB2HSH on September 09, 2013, 06:14:50 AM
40 and 10.

40 is great no matter what time of year (in my opinion), and 10 always has a surprise or two...even in the bottom of the solar cycle.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA0HVE on September 09, 2013, 08:10:36 AM
I worked on getting set up for 20 meters Friday night and tried it out a little bit Saturday afternoon and some last night.  1270+ miles to a guy in Maine that gave me a 589 while I was running 5 watts.  Now I have 40 meters and 20 meters working well enough to have some fun.

Of course there's always room for antenna improvements.  That's my next goal.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W8GP on September 10, 2013, 10:53:40 AM
40 and 160, 40 'cause it's easy, and 160 because it's not!


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA0HVE on September 11, 2013, 10:11:53 AM
Yesterday morning, 1,500+ miles on just under 5 watts.  That was my goal.  Not that it's something to brag about but with a better antenna system I can expect even better.

QRP amazes me! :)


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AA4PB on September 11, 2013, 10:52:38 AM
10,000+ miles, 10W PEP SSB, 20M, with a 3el Yagi at 60 feet. A lucky combination of good propagation, a decent antenna, and a well equipped station with low noise levels at the other end.  ;)


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA0HVE on September 16, 2013, 12:13:35 PM
Yesterday, 1,157.9 miles with 1 watt on 20 meters using CW.

I'm amazed with every contact.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: PA1ZP on September 19, 2013, 08:50:18 AM
Hi to you all

My order is SSB:

40, 20, 80, 17, 30.

If I had to do it for CW it would look like:

80 , 40


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: K7CB on September 20, 2013, 10:44:19 AM
Which 2 HF bands would you choose if you had to make a choice?

I'd go with 40 and 20.  I like 40 because, living in CO, I have friends in AZ and NM I like to keep in touch with and I can do so on 40 during both day and night hours for the most part and 20M because it's almost always open to somewhere during the day and evening.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: NO2A on September 21, 2013, 04:59:33 PM
For qrp certainly 40/30  40/20  40/17.  I`ve worked quite a few qrp stations (not me) on 80 fairly local is good. If you were limited to 1 band which would you choose?


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KB2HSH on October 07, 2013, 10:09:06 AM
If I was limited to only ONE band: 40


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: G4YVM on October 07, 2013, 10:16:01 AM
30m. 40m.

David
G4YVM


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KD5TXX on October 10, 2013, 08:06:51 PM
40m then either 20 or 17m.  I have been enjoying 10m lately but is is a random thing....


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KE7TMA on October 14, 2013, 09:15:46 PM
I've not upgraded yet but the challenge and possibilities of top-band are hard to resist (hence the reason I want to upgrade) and 40m is of course pretty useful day or night.

Then again, 15m is also a bit of a fun one, with openings to Japan reachable with QRP power from here in Oregon.

I don't seem to have much luck with 6m or 10m, especially when it comes to digital or CW.  Maybe nobody's listening!


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W4KVW on October 15, 2013, 03:06:33 PM
For me 17 & 20 are my Favorite bands.Great DX bands & I'm a DX chaser.Not much of a fan of 40 meters because it's over run with too many nets in the day time & broadcast stations at night which pretty much makes it useless for my style of operating. ;)   8)    :)  {:>)

Clayton
W4KVW


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: ZENKI on October 18, 2013, 08:18:02 PM
If CW 30 and 20 meters
If SSB 40 and 30 meters

With 20 or 25 watts of power anything is possible!


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W1JKA on October 19, 2013, 08:07:10 AM
Re: ZENKI  "with 20 or 25 watts of power anything is possible"  ???

    Sounds as though you may be having problems with your rig or antenna system. Myself and a few others have found out above 25 watts and below 20 watts anything is possible also.       


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: WB0KSL on October 19, 2013, 10:47:17 AM
Quote
Yesterday at 08:18:02 PM Posted by: ZENKI

If CW 30 and 20 meters
If SSB 40 and 30 meters

With 20 or 25 watts of power anything is possible!

For 30 meter SSB, I think 1 milliwatt would be plenty ;)

73 de wb0ksl
John


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: K2CMH on October 19, 2013, 07:19:31 PM
>If SSB 40 and 30 meters

No SSB on 30 meters.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KA2UUP on October 21, 2013, 08:31:21 AM
40 and 20 meters.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: WA7SGS on October 24, 2013, 10:08:10 PM
40m and 20m offer the best 24/7 combination IMO.  If it was all about fun times and more of a challenge I'd say 160m and 15m! 

Rick


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AA4GA on October 25, 2013, 06:20:47 AM
If SSB 40 and 30 meters
SSB on 30 meters?  Not in the US, which is the location of the OP!  I'm not sure about elsewhere...

Quote
With 20 or 25 watts of power anything is possible!
No, some communications require more than 25 watts of power...but, since this is the QRP forum, one should presume the OP was referring to using 5 watts or less, as that is defined as the topic of discussion for this forum.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W1JKA on October 25, 2013, 07:37:31 AM
 Re: AA4GA  reply #37

  As of this date I believe ZENKI's "Official" definition for QRP power both CW and SSB  patent registration is still pending at the U.S.Patent Office. ;)


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: M0SVB on November 26, 2013, 12:52:30 AM
40m and 17m would be my choice, although to effectively use 40m (local very high noise levels) I have to work portable.

Steve M0SVB


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: VE3LYX on November 29, 2013, 04:00:48 AM
80M &  40M
Don


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: WB4TJH on November 30, 2013, 10:11:12 AM
40 and 20 would be my choice for two QRP bands, ssb or cw But I would have to have THREE to be really  happy--I would include 30 meters for qrp  cw as well. With these 3 bands, I could  be satified.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KB2FCV on December 02, 2013, 12:15:52 PM
40/20 1st choice... 30/20 second choice.

40/20 gives great daytime / nighttime coverage... but 30 is also good daytime/nighttime. You can do pretty well with a small antenna that fits in your pocket.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: N1NQC on December 02, 2013, 01:28:02 PM
 Hey All,

I'd take  15M and 40M  as choice #1 ( using the same 40 M antenna - NICE !) and 40M and 10M as choice #2.

Considering the FLEA power I use on 40M (1.5 or so W SSB) I have LOTS of NE U.S. contacts  during the DAY.On 15M Europe  has been "fairly easy" at .75 W SSB. 10M is MUCH more  of a challenge at .5 W SSB. Of course 10M is a much more "fussy" band, but when it's up it's GREAT.

K


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: ZENKI on December 06, 2013, 06:06:25 PM
Yeah it is,,, you wont have to  say "whats your name" "give me your name again, QRM" , "what did you ask me", " did he put it back to me" "i am losing you" Instead if you ran 25 watts as minimum especially on SSB you have a very high chance of completing a DX QSO into a place like Europe with complete success. I can run 25 watts on 40 meters and with a 1/4 vertical from my portable location and I can maintain my regulars QSO's into the USA without issue. If I reduced my power to 5 or 10 watts most stations  cant copy me its that simple. Please dont  give me the "its only 3db textbook nonsense" the point is that its effective and compensating for noise, propagation and other losses.

Being  a 5 watt QRP nazi is like  going to a gun fight with a slingshot because you think but are not sure if it will kill a man. We dont find QRP hunters going out shooting elephant and wild boars with a BB gun because they might  get lucky. They go out with the tools to get the job done. Power output is a tool that compensates for things like antenna losses, propagation losses and any other vagaries of propagation.  You guys are only arguing about QRP power because you have some Pavlovian  preconditioned belief set by some contest power limit that   low power QRP is gods  ruling at 5 watts. Why not make it 1 watt if you so tough and can do so well.

Any reasonable operator knows that on some bands even 100 watts and dipole is struggle. These  stations are in the majority so they know what reality is. Then you have QRP diehards arrogantly suggesting that 5 watts or 10 watts on SSB is  good enough. It is very far from the  reality of the vast majority of hams in the world. Reality is is just not on your side of the argument. I like low power operation and after 40 years of operation through extensive testing I am confident that if I go to any part of the planet  with a reasonable antenna I can make contacts, exchange names and report and have some chit chat with the majority of hams. I dont have to confine myself to  some magazine contest rule power limit.  Thats why I use 25 watts. Its the best bang for the buck versus power output  that can be achieved with battery power. Its also the power limit that can practically carried without  needing  a pack mule carrying batteries fuel and other accessories that spiral out of control catering for higher power.

This 5 watt QRP limit is just some imaginary  power level made to make life hard  and unpractical under most circumstances. If this power limit was arrived through technical analysis by doing extensive HF link calculations I would accept it. But where the argument falls apart  badly about the contest 5 watt power limit is the non consideration of effective radiated power. If I use a 5 watts into a 20dbi stacked array with X Erp I am legal. If I run 5 watts into a Magnetic loop I am legal despite the station with the stacked yagi running the equivalent of 500 watts of power before we consider the takeoff angle gain. Who is kidding who here with this moronic technical argument about 5 watt QRP  power being an absolute when this rule legalizes gain cheating if you dont run an amp  to equal the ERP of the antenna cheat.  You can clearly see how moronic  the contest rules are. Then to have stations cling to this power level  and argue about the supposed righteousness of this 5 watt limit exposes the flaws in their arguments. You can be an antenna gain cheat but you cant obtain the same gain equivalence  with an amplifier. This is the line of argument that has  been run here and its a nonsense argument about  religious belief not about fairness or about effectiveness. The whole objective is to produce an effective station. That can be antenna gain, QTH gain or more gain from running something like 25 watts. Its the principle that is used by every normal QRO ham in the world. Cant have a 60ft boom monobander why not use a 1kw amplifier to give myself some advantage? Why is it such a criminal thing  to do in the QRP community when saying going from 5 watts to 25 watts is still in the spirit of intention of low power and portability? Besides the overarching  principle should be about  communicating and getting the message through. Its not about your battle and failure because of your insistence about believing in what  the tooth fairy contest committee who tells  you that you a bad boy if you dont run 5 watts. This is the only argument  we getting  about  the 5 watt power limit. Its not about science its about religious  belief and what the grand poobah's told them to say and do not to do whats best for them.

What other stations do for enjoyment thats there business. But when your argument take on a religious  fervor that has no basis in science then  I cant accept those arguments. This is especially so when you and others try and push the QRP operating with something like 5 watts  as a successful endeavor that can be achieved  24/7 every day of the year. Next we will have government officials believing this BS  and telling hams that other hams can do it with 5 watts thats what the legal power level should be.

Just as you know what  antenna is a bad or good antenna I and many others know what a poor  power level is on SSB. You dont have to be a engineer to figure out how a modest increase in power from 5 watts to something like 25 watts can be. The problem is that most QRP operators dont have SSB portable QRP equipment that can run 5 watts or greater so they have never even tried say running 25 watts  portable. So then its no surprise that they react like you burning their bibles and stomping on it. Besides what have I got to gain by also sticking to some arbitary power level like 25 watts? if it  was not effective, is 25 my lucky number? No its not, the point is that it works and  you can enjoy ham radio. It does not matter whether you on a park bench, boat, hotel cruise boat, a student in a dorm, its a power level that can work well  with  any  antenna that a ham can imagine and come with. Thats the advantage it just works. Ham radio is about making things work and communicating not smashing your head into brick wall trying to reach mars  by raising your voice into the mic. Oh I hear them religous 5 watt QRP operators screaming and behaving like CB'er with their FT817s cranking knobs to the right because they dont have enough power. Shameful ignorant  behaviour when all they had to do is go out portable with station that at least ran 25 watts. You would not have to cause splatter or start behaving like CB'er thinking that turning up the mic gain is  turning your 5 watts into  25 watts. What the most popular accessory   that everyone is looking for  their FT817? Of course its a small portable amplifier that boosts it power to  something like 25 to 50 watts. Again more evidence based examples of the hard realities of  5 watt QRP operation that proves that for most  users its  largely a painful  and unrewarding experience.

Back a long time ago, when ham radio was just evolving and starting. Most hams were running  around  25 watts of power in doublet antennas. I used to listen to them  when I was SWL'er. Even when moving over to AM this was still a popular power. Back then dreaming about 25 to 40 watts on phone  was liking dreaming about 1500 watts from your Alpha. So the tradition of ham radio was almost founded on this power level which worked well for many station. A bit of nostalgia but this 25 watt experiment is  nothing new. Those who are not into QRP or throwing wires up a tree from a park bench, please try it. During a DX QSO call with 100 watts. Turn your power  down to 25 watts and see who comments! So far in the hundreds of regular DX stations worked none ever said, wow you gone down into the noise. They just carried on as if all my knobs and power output  was normal. The case rests when the  vast majority of hams cant notice the difference and it  works so well from a portable  location. Why would you want anything less than close to 100% reliability and effectiveness? Of course I respect your right to carry a .22 and run  5 watts thats your busines. I feel happier with my .45acp and my 25 watt manpack radio. I think I can do the job better without carrying a  barret light 50cal, 1kw amp and a ton of gas on a trailer. Its all  a matter of practicality and reality. KISS 25 watts!

Again the  QRP  5 watt argument fails  purely when you consider the effectiveness of  different communications modes.  Those who dont understand the effectiveness of one mode versus another would be advised to read the excellent article in December's QST by KE4PT. He is a diehard  QRP fanatic and in a unbiased technical article discusses the advantage of one mode versus another. Failing to consider the superiority of  CW over SSB is technical ignorance at its best. Sure nothing prevents you from trying and achieving pot luck.  If you want an advantage over CW just turn your power up to 25 watts job done! Got a really crap antenna turn the power up to 25 watts. Amazing how the world changes when you can get heard. Life is too short not to be heard, what good is talking if people cant understand the message. Life is long enough for operation  at the 25 watt portable level.

Ham companies please  make more  25 watt  radios that can also be operated from modern battery packs. I dont  need  a radio that runs off watch batteries or batteries mean to run kids toys. I need a battery pack that can run my radio for a day at 25 watts. I just got a new HF manpack radio, and its just superb.

http://www.codanradio.com/product/2110manpack/

This Codan HF radio  is just such a perfect radio for HF portable QRP operation. The DSP noise reduction just puts  so many radios to shame. The battery packs are excellent and the whole package is just so convenient.  The magic part about this radio is its power output, its 25 watts and works very well. I wonder why they chose 25 watts of output. Someone tell CODAN  they should have listened to the 5 watt  QRP contest committee because they know about these things. The military and all the professional HF users dont know what they talking about!  Now look at this nice Codan radio and compared it to the Ft817, external battery back, amplifier. Or even worst compare the Codan to a KX3 with amplifier and its huge mess of cables and  accessories.  Hams must like  radios that are impractical and a holy mess when compared to the practical design effectiveness of a HFmanpack radio with 25 watts of output power. Please open your minds, and use the tools and equipment that work rather than have  narrow minded views of equipment and techniques that work.

Re: ZENKI  "with 20 or 25 watts of power anything is possible"  ???

    Sounds as though you may be having problems with your rig or antenna system. Myself and a few others have found out above 25 watts and below 20 watts anything is possible also.       


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AA4GA on December 07, 2013, 06:17:28 AM
Yes, 5 watts as a defining power level for "QRP" is arbitrary.  As is the US 1500 watt legal limit.  As is the 100 watt class in many contests.  As is your 25 watt chosen power output.

But, 5 watts is the accepted definition of "QRP", no matter how it was decided.

And, FWIW, there are some contests out there that have a 1 watt class.  I operated in one this summer at the 1 watt level, and made QSOs and had fun, although I didn't win the category.

Back a long time ago, when ham radio was just evolving and starting. Most hams were running  around  25 watts of power in doublet antennas. I used to listen to them  when I was SWL'er.
Are you saying you were around when amateur radio started?  Wow, you must be very old!

Judging by your failure to identify yourself with a callsign, I can only assume you are not a licensed amateur and are still engaged as an "SWL'er".




Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: K0OD on December 07, 2013, 07:57:56 AM

Back a long time ago, when ham radio was just evolving and starting. Most hams were running  around  25 watts of power in doublet antennas. I used to listen to them  when I was SWL'er.
Are you saying you were around when amateur radio started?  Wow, you must be very old!


Bizarre, eh?

"Standard" entry level power was probably 75 watts input, which was the novice limit and roughly the limit of a single 807 or 6146, when I got into radio in the mid-1950s.  Popular transmitters included Heath DX20s and DX35/40s. My first transmitter was a Heath DX100 running 150 watts from a pair of 6146's. That level was also very common. CQ Mag used to do an annual equipment survey in those days and the DX100 was the most commonly used transmitter. I'm sure Vikings were close behind. Most U.S. hams ran more than 25 watts.

When I look at my earliest DX QSLs I'm struck that many foreign stations ran lower power.... 6V6 tubes and the like.  


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: OH6I on December 08, 2013, 07:56:21 AM
Quote
Zenki: I feel happier with my .45acp and my 25 watt manpack radio.
Because bears here in Finland are large I feel happy with my HEAVY loaded .45 Colt Ruger Bisley. And inside rucksack is K2  :)
Jari
OH6I


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: KI5WW on December 27, 2013, 05:17:30 PM
40 amd 20


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: ZENKI on December 28, 2013, 07:18:01 PM
Yeah I am internet SWL'er I dont need a callsign to use a browser or the internet.

Do you need  to give your pilots licence number to discuss flying on the internet?
Do I need to submit my drivers licence number before joining a automobile group?

You guys are such control freaks. You guys should move to China where everyone is monitored and you have to be careful about what you say.

5  watts is a arbitrary contest rule power limit. Someone just plucked the figure from the air.

All I am arguing for a practical power limit  that is effective 99% of the time.  I call it  practical necessary communications power.
Try it 25 watts someday and you will see how nobody makes comment about your crap signal. You dont even have to ask for sympathy by saying /QRP
You can be a proud ham by standing on your own  2 feet and make  QRP sympathy free  qso's

I am waiting for the YL voice option for 5 watt QRP radios. When the 5 watts fails you can turn on the "yl voice option" Please stand by,  the young lady please call now!
Oh YL you QRP  I can hear you now! With 25 watts I dont have to worry about the calling tricks and procedures.

Its a free world, you can do and run whatever power limit you chose thats OK.
I am not  trying to make you change your habits.  Lets get it clear.  I am ADVOCATING 25 watts of HF output as a legitimate low power QRP SSB power
limit because it just about has a 99% reliability. Its effectiveness on SSB is about as effective as 5 watts of CW power when considering the signal to noise ratio.
Its also a power level that can easily be accommodated by modern battery and charging systems. I am not telling you to cheat in the contest or modify your enjoyment of ham radio. I am saying that 5 watt QRP contest power level for all modes is  a ridiculous power level  that makes no technical sense without a weighting or rating system that makes the results work more fairly. Just look at the QRP contest results, why has CW got higher QSO rates than SSB? That answer is a nobrainer so why do put up with these endless nonsensical  arguments here about the effectiveness of 5 watts on SSB. If we increased the power in contests to the 25 watt limit which would put SSB on the same effective footing as CW maybe more people would  participate. With a HF manpack and 25 watts of output  I can easily do 400 QSO's on either 40 or 20 meters without trying DX or Local. It just works so I dont need convincing. What I would ask you guys to do is try it before being so ummmmh negative and hostile. Generally if 25 watts is effective and you mention that you running 25 watts most will ask you to lower your power down to the 5 watt level. Cant be copied crank it back up to 25 watts. You dont need relay stations or sympathy stations helping you out.


Yes, 5 watts as a defining power level for "QRP" is arbitrary.  As is the US 1500 watt legal limit.  As is the 100 watt class in many contests.  As is your 25 watt chosen power output.

But, 5 watts is the accepted definition of "QRP", no matter how it was decided.

And, FWIW, there are some contests out there that have a 1 watt class.  I operated in one this summer at the 1 watt level, and made QSOs and had fun, although I didn't win the category.

Back a long time ago, when ham radio was just evolving and starting. Most hams were running  around  25 watts of power in doublet antennas. I used to listen to them  when I was SWL'er.
Are you saying you were around when amateur radio started?  Wow, you must be very old!

Judging by your failure to identify yourself with a callsign, I can only assume you are not a licensed amateur and are still engaged as an "SWL'er".





Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: ZENKI on December 28, 2013, 07:34:09 PM
You calling me bizarre because your  ham radio memory only remembers radios that were bought and by what you remember. So the ham radio world only revolved around your planet? All the homebrew ham stations well before all the commercial novice  black box transmitters  dont count eh? I think you need  to take your blinkers off  and start broadening your views about ham radios history. Ham radio did not start with  what you bought in the shop as novice in the 50's or what power limit the FCC set for novices, get real! Your memory about the transmitters  used is a very narrow black box operators view of the ham radio world. There was thousand of  more hams around the world who could not walk into a shop and order their favorite novice black box radio. Maybe you forgot all the QSL's you received as novice from foreign hams who routinely ran 20 to 50 watts from homebrew radios.  20 watts to 25 watts was a popular CW power. Novices were running output power that many hams around the world only dreamed about. But the difference was the novices bought their radio and the hams they were speaking too probably built theirs.  The choice of parts was governed by what they could  scrounge not by what new blackbox they could buy. American novices were lucky hams there is no doubt about that.


Yeah I am old so what! Any more put downs? You are young so I forgive  you ignorance about ham radio history! Do you need a history Elmer?




Back a long time ago, when ham radio was just evolving and starting. Most hams were running  around  25 watts of power in doublet antennas. I used to listen to them  when I was SWL'er.
Are you saying you were around when amateur radio started?  Wow, you must be very old!


Bizarre, eh?

"Standard" entry level power was probably 75 watts input, which was the novice limit and roughly the limit of a single 807 or 6146, when I got into radio in the mid-1950s.  Popular transmitters included Heath DX20s and DX35/40s. My first transmitter was a Heath DX100 running 150 watts from a pair of 6146's. That level was also very common. CQ Mag used to do an annual equipment survey in those days and the DX100 was the most commonly used transmitter. I'm sure Vikings were close behind. Most U.S. hams ran more than 25 watts.

When I look at my earliest DX QSLs I'm struck that many foreign stations ran lower power.... 6V6 tubes and the like.  


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: ZENKI on December 28, 2013, 07:38:34 PM
Dont forget the Leuku in case it jams!
I like my Leuku knife and carry it everywhere.

Any gun is better than no gun when it come to  the bears

Quote
Zenki: I feel happier with my .45acp and my 25 watt manpack radio.
Because bears here in Finland are large I feel happy with my HEAVY loaded .45 Colt Ruger Bisley. And inside rucksack is K2  :)
Jari
OH6I


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: N4OI on December 29, 2013, 05:11:34 AM
Which 2 HF bands would you choose if you had to make a choice?

For QRP CW, 40 meters and 20 meters are the top two…  the next two are 30 meters and 15 meters.  (Those four comprise my K1 setup.)

73


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: AA4GA on December 29, 2013, 11:19:05 AM
Yeah I am internet SWL'er I dont need a callsign to use a browser or the internet.
I thought so!

Quote
Do you need  to give your pilots licence number to discuss flying on the internet?
No, but most pilots who own their own aircraft do put their tail numbers in their signatures.

Quote
Do I need to submit my drivers licence number before joining a automobile group?
No, but many people in auto-specific forums will list in their signature information about their cars.

You see, in amateur radio (you will learn this when you get a license), one is known by his callsign.  It is a way of identification among fellow enthusiasts.  You will learn that it is something to be proud of, not a source of shame.

Quote
You guys are such control freaks.
No, you are the one who is advocating change of the established limits - it is *you* trying to control others! 

Quote
5  watts is a arbitrary contest rule power limit. Someone just plucked the figure from the air.
Possibly, although I would imagine it had some more tangible basis when it did eventually become the generally accepted definition.  I don't really care - it is the established limit, and one I choose to operate within.  It is also the power limit defined for discussion in this forum.

Quote
All I am arguing for a practical power limit  that is effective 99% of the time.  I call it  practical necessary communications power.
Try it 25 watts someday and you will see how nobody makes comment about your crap signal. You dont even have to ask for sympathy by saying /QRP

No one says QRP is supposed to be effective 99% of the time.  Or, let me rephrase that:  no one says QRP is supposed to be successful 99% of the time.  I actually find operating at the 5 watt and under level extremely practical all the time, and even 1500 watts is not effective 100% of the time.

Once you study and sit for a radio amateur license, and then get some actual experience, maybe you will comprehend more.

Quote
With a HF manpack and 25 watts of output  I can easily do 400 QSO's on either 40 or 20 meters without trying DX or Local.
Well, I'd be happy to see you get your license, do just that, and post a link to the published contest results.  I'm pretty sure that would be easy to do in a contest weekend.  Without trying very hard, I've done the same thing....or more often, 200-300 QSOs in a weekend with limited operating time.  You're welcome to search published contest results for my call. 

Let's assume you do go to the effort of getting a license.  Why do you insist on coming to a forum that's stated purpose is discussion of operations at the 5 watt level and under and try to change that?  No one here cares if you operate using 25 watts or 1500 watts or whatever the legal limit is wherever you may live.  Just don't come in here saying that what we do is ineffective or poorly defined.  It is what it is - accept it, or go somewhere else to discuss the off-topic operations you hope to engage in once you are licensed.

Quote
It just works so I dont need convincing. What I would ask you guys to do is try it before being so ummmmh negative and hostile. Generally if 25 watts is effective and you mention that you running 25 watts most will ask you to lower your power down to the 5 watt level. Cant be copied crank it back up to 25 watts.

I don't need convincing either.  I find that 5 watts or less is almost always effective for me.   If I can't make a QSO at 5 watts, so what?  I wait, or it doesn't happen.  Lately, I've been operating more and more at the 1 watt and under power level.  Is it less "effective" than operating at 5 watt?  Yes.  So? 

The "ZENKI" schtick is getting pretty tiresome.


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: W7ASA on December 29, 2013, 09:54:50 PM
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQpfoloUWaqy10wkdkvAUzPfJXQD-8V94mHIx10J2m3iVwvKcoQ)

Zenki = 1/The Laws of Physics


de Ray
W7ASA  ..._  ._



Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: PBPP on December 30, 2013, 07:25:00 PM
(http://i39.tinypic.com/15fpt1j.jpg)

~ Mitch ~


Title: RE: If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?
Post by: WD4ELG on December 31, 2013, 10:46:34 PM
40 and 20.