[CQ-Contest] modest proposal ...up to 200w

Matt Murphy matt at nq6n.com
Tue Oct 11 11:33:27 EDT 2016

With the likely FCC rule change permitting higher gain for amateur
amplifiers and modern high power MOSFETs, I'd actually expect to see more
new HF transceivers manufactured with only 15-35W output capability...
plenty to generate legal limit from most of the newer amplifiers, and
plenty for the JT modes and only a few dB down from 100W without the power,
size, and heat dissipation requirements of a 100W or 200W transceiver.

In terms of the cost of solid state QRO operation, the non-MOSFET
components of an amplifier or amplifier+ATU seem to be fairly comparable at
the 100W and 500W level, with a bit more cost added above 1KW.

100W power levels seem to be an artifact of linear power supplies used on
HF, not a cost or engineering complexity limit.

The above comment may be completely inaccurate or off base. Please take it
with a grain of salt.

Matt NQ6N

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Ed Sawyer <sawyered at earthlink.net> wrote:

> In addition to all ARRL HF contests being 150W for Low Power, the CQ WW 160
> contests are also 150W.
> The extra 50W matters in very marginal QSO attempts like 160 and on 10 M
> when the signals are on the noise floor.  Having run Low Power exclusively
> for 11 years from 2004 - 2015, I can tell you I have experimented with
> this.
> I used to have a 200W FT1000 Mark V and a 100W radio for radio 2 and
> changed
> it to 2 x Mark Vs just to be able to run 150W on both radios in those
> contests that allow 150W.  It matters.
> Ed  N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list