Do you even know what "regaled" means? On HF CW is FAR less efficient then
other forms of data transmission. We need a CW requirement because 1% or less of
hams use moonbounce??--get serious! I won't even attempt to explain the EME
problems that CW addresses like doppler shift, etc. You call several second EME
contacts--usually set up on scheds with huge antennas and lots of
power--"effective communications"--interesting.
Andy K5VM
Jon Ogden wrote:
> >Yeah, a rather interesting one to me. If you are running CW--unless you are
> >trying to bounce off the moon--you don't need a linear running 1500++++
> >watts--a decent antenna and 100 watts will do just fine. I like SSB and
> >lots of
> >power.
>
> Gees, the virtue of CW. Here is a man who has regaled it and just now
> states a virtue or it! It can EFFECTIVELY communicate with much less
> power than is required for phone. I thought you said it was inefficient?
> Another contradiction........
>
> 73,
>
> Jon
> KE9NA
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Ogden
>
> jono@enteract.com
> www.qsl.net/ke9na
>
> "A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|