You certainly don't need an amplifier for JT65 and most are not using
them. I worked half a dozen stations last night on 160 - mostly new
states from here in Florida - using nothing more than my 80/40 trap
inverted V and 100 Watts. Worked KH6SAT on 80 with the same antenna
and power level ... expect to be able to do the same on 160 when I get
a "real" antenna for that band.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 12/31/2011 2:15 PM, Darl DEEDS wrote:
> I was under the impression that JT65 was a weak signal mode. 600 watts seems
> a lot for that. Is that a normal power level for that? I was hoping to work
> it without an amplifier.
>
> Darl NA8W
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Jim Brown"<jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 2:00 PM
> To:<topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160M JT65HF
>
>> On 12/30/2011 9:14 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>> Most JT65 activity is relatively low power - typically between 10 and
>>> 50 watts on HF.
>>
>> I fired up on 1838 last night running 600W to my usual Tee vertical. In
>> about two hours, I worked about 15 guys in 10 states, including XE1, VT
>> and NC, all of whom were running less than 30 watts. I left the JT65HF
>> software running all night, and when I came into the shack this morning
>> saw activity from at least a dozen stations.
>>
>> Another point -- while I was making those Qs, there were often at least
>> two other QSOs going on simultaneously, mostly with somewhat different
>> frequency offsets -- plus or minus as much as 500 Hz. The JT65 software
>> protocol and decoder are quite good at looking only for the desired
>> signal, and JT65HF software can decode several signals at the same time.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> _______________________________________________
>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|