I do have amplifiers although my highest powered one won't quite make
1500-watts (it will do about 1400-watts) and have had since the mid 1970s. I
also agree that having the best antenna possible for one's circumstances is
correct.
For casual operation (not contesting or primarily working DX), the principle
criteria is being able to work, basically, anything that you can hear. If that
is the case, then whatever power you are running is, pretty much, optimum. If
you are constantly hearing stations but are not able to establish
communications with those stations, then you do need more power (up to the
legal limit). If you are constantly not able to have a real QSO with stations
that are calling you (i.e. answering your CQ), then you need a better antenna
or else reduce your transmit power.
It is unfortunate, but, I do hear stations calling CQ, etc., that are ignoring
a substantial number of other stations that are calling. Either the receiving
ability of the antenna is lacking or the station has a high noise level. In
either case, that station is an "alligator" (big mouth, little ears). In
general, that station is, primarily, just adding to the profit margin of his /
her local electric company.
Then, there are those stations that can constantly hear other stations but just
cannot get through. Those stations are "elephants" (big ears, little mouth).
In those situations, more transmit power would be appropriate because the
antenna is not the weakest link. However, one does need to be careful because
increasing power also increases the chances for RFI. Even though the amateur
radio operator is in the "right" for any number of reasons, one still has to be
aware of the potential of angry neighbors. Fortunately, with cable and
satellite television, TVI is no longer a major problem. Unfortunately, the
number of other devices than can intercept the signal because of poor design
(i.d. shielding) which most consumers are not aware of the situation.
Therefore, the unwashed masses are enraged because they have spent money for
devices expecting them to function properly no matter what no matter if the
manufacturer is the real problem.
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.net
From: Catherine James <catherine.james@att.net>
To: Amps group <amps@contesting.com>; Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] new amp race
Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com> wrote:
> Cathy wrote:
>> Yes, it irritates me to see an endless stream of comments in many
>> forums along the lines of "don't get an amp, invest in better antennas,"
>> usually posted by hams with legal limit amps. :-/
> Why would that irritate you? It's probably the best radio-related advice you
> will ever get.
> And what does having or not having a legal limit amp have to do with the
> advice?
Because it feels like "do as I say, not as I do." A person who owns an amp is
telling other hams
not to buy one. If it's so useless, why does the poster have one himself?
If the advice were "put up the best antenna you can within the limits you have
of cost,
space, permissions, etc. I would agree with it 100%. But it's often given in
the context
of "spend your money on a tower and beam, not an amplifier."
I have a take on that, published in our local newsletter recently, and I'll
post a link here once
it goes up on the web. It boils down to an in-depth look at the right order in
which to upgrade
a station, and recommends going from decent antennas to an amp to better
antennas.
It's nearly always going to be cheaper and quicker to install an amp that to
put up a serious tower.
Or as someone else once wrote, the cheapest 10 dB bargain in amateur radio is a
1kw amplifier. The next cheapest 10 db is installing a tribander at 70 ft or
higher. Getting the next 10 dB after this is very expensive, and few will do it.
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|