If limited to only 2 HF bands which would you choose?

[AA4GA]

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".

[K0OD]

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.  

[OH6I]

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

[KI5WW]

40 amd 20

[ZENKI]

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".

[ZENKI]

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.  

[ZENKI]

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

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

[N4OI]

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

[AA4GA]

Yeah I am internet SWL'er I dont need a callsign to use a browser or the internet.

I thought so!

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.

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.

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! 

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.

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.

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.

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.

[W7ASA]

Zenki = 1/The Laws of Physics


de Ray
W7ASA  ..._  ._

[PBPP]

~ Mitch ~

[WD4ELG]

40 and 20.