[CQ-Contest] 73 watts

[Jeff Draughn]

Maybe he was just saying 59 and best wishes...


On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 1:38 PM Jim Stahl via CQ-Contest <
cq-contest at contesting.com> wrote:

> At least they weren’t running fifty nine watts. (Or 599 watts on CW)
>
>
>
>
>
> 73 -  Jim  K8MR
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 10, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Eric Gruff <egruff at cox.net> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > For those of you complaining about the "73" power report, I have to say
>
> > "really?". The rules say that the DX exchange is (emphasis mine), " DX
>
> > stations send signal report and power (number or abbreviation indicating
>
> > APPROXIMATE transmitter output power)." So, there's no need for a power
>
> > meter calibrated to three decimal points anyway.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In the CW weekend, I received a lot of "NN" (99 Watts), which is a lot
>
> > faster to send than "1TT" or "ATT" or "100". No one is complaining about
>
> > that. If a station wants to report 73 Watts, I log it and move on. Many
>
> > rigs, including my Flex, don't put out a full 100 W on many bands, and
> "73"
>
> > is close enough to the actual output, not to mention that most hams can
>
> > decode "73" in their sleep. It's not like they're going to save time and
>
> > boost score by sending "73" instead of "NN".
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I think we can go back to arguing about important things, like is using
> an
>
> > SDR or having your kids bring you coffee during a contest considered
>
> > assisted operating.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Everyday life and work are stressful enough - let's have fun with our
> hobby
>
> > as much as we can!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 73 de NC6K
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> CQ-Contest mailing list
>
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>