Topband: 160 Power

Mon Mar 20 21:44:06 EDT 2017

I fully agree with John. I have been running 100 watts in to a dipole on 160 and all I am raising is electricity bill from years. Unless you have decent power on TB no use warming the chair.
73
vu2gsm
Kanti

> On Mar 21, 2017, at 05:42, John Harden, D.M.D. <jhdmd at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> 
> If you want to work the rare ones on Top Band low power is pointless... You are simply banging your head against the wall... It takes maximum power, great receiving antennas and a good transmitting antenna. I really starting hearing well when I began using a rotary FLAG at 95 feet in DIVERSITY RECEIVE with a Hi-Z 8 Array...
> 
> 73,
> 
> 
> John, W4NU
> 
> K4JAG (1959 to 1998)
> 
> 
>> On 3/20/2017 12:25 PM, rick darwicki via Topband wrote:
>> In contests I call a lot of guys barefoot first and kick on the amp as needed. Problem is usually a guy running full power can be heard out here but has an S-8 noise level and can't hear 100W..Yes you can work a lot of DX with low power, but as an ex-QRP club member I learned life if too short, 9 to go for DXCC on 160 and sweating it.
>> 5U and TU can't hear me thru the pile up but I'll bet they can copy if there was nobody else on.
>> Tried JT65 and it seems CW work also work when it works.Bottom line is you typically need power on the low bands to overcome the other guys noise. Rick N6PE======================================================================
>> There are more planes in the ocean than submarines in the sky
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>       From: "topband-request at contesting.com" <topband-request at contesting.com>
>>  To: topband at contesting.com
>>  Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 9:11 AM
>>  Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 171, Issue 17
>>    Send Topband mailing list submissions to
>>     topband at contesting.com
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>     topband-request at contesting.com
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>     topband-owner at contesting.com
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>>   1. Digital modes on TB and power required (Jim Jim)
>>   2. Re: Digital modes on TB and power required (wb6rse1 at mac.com)
>>   3. Re: Digital modes on TB and power required (HAROLD SMITH JR)
>>   4. Re: Digital modes on TB and power required (Mike Waters)
>>   5. Re: JT65 Power and bandwidth (Rob Atkinson)
>> 
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 21:14:12 -0400 (EDT)
>> From: Jim Jim <wa3mej at comcast.net>
>> To: List-Topband <topband at contesting.com>
>> Subject: Topband: Digital modes on TB and power required
>> Message-ID: <1176951029.186017.1489972452731 at connect.xfinity.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> 
>> Guys,
>> 
>> First of all in many cases the reason we need really high power on any mode is because other hams on the band are using it and they cover us up... so it is mine is bigger than yours.  Now to be fair that is not always the case I know but it happens far too much.  Since we are in the years of the bottom of the solar cycle we actually may need more power.  Also you can not compare doing meteor scatter or EME work with HF work.  There you absolutely need power unless you have stacked 18 element beams or something.  But I have seen very very few instances when 50 watts wont get the job done EVEN on 160M.  and NO I don't run my RX with a wide open front end I have an IC 7300 and I trim my RX and TX filters to a reasonable width based on the mode I am running.  Common sense (and good engineering principals) teach you if you cut the RX bandwidth the signal goes up in strength. You have only to try that with CW to learn that.    and for those of you that don't understand the princi
> p
>>  al of RX front end overload try having a neighbor 4 miles away as the crow files who is trying to call the same DX you are wanting to work he can be half a kHz away and still give you problems even with a good RX. Now you guys with the really big antennas can mitigate some of this but us little pistols have only once choice ... wait until you neighbor is done.  And to be neighborly both my neighbor and I do just that.  Something to also consider when you run any digital mode even RTTY and you do it through a sound card you should not be drawing ANY.. not even a little ALC and if you do you not only will make it hard for others to copy you but you could easily cause all kinds of splatter on the band, you have only to listen to some to the signal on 40 and 20 meters to see this.
>> 
>> I am not saying any of this to flame or inflame anyone it is simply the way it is. High power is RARELY necessary on the lower bands.
>> 
>> 
>> Doubt me?  Set your transceiver up on WSPR and set it to 20w  and find out.  When TB was open I was heard all over the world with that power .. and yes even VK.  If all of this is not convincing then follow the FCC rules .. use only the power necessary to do that job
>> 
>> 
>> Oh by the way many of these digital modes are high duty cycle and could do damage to your transceiver.
>> 
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On the higher bands, low power generally gets the job done. But digital
>> folks on 160 need to rethink a few things. Ideally, we should ALL just bump
>> our output up to 100 watts. But that's just not gonna happen.  ?
>> 
>> I don't have the time right now to add more, but I hope this thread nets
>> some useful suggestions to minimize QRN in the 160m digital portion.
>> 
>> 73, Mike
>> www.w0btu.com http://www.w0btu.com/
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 18:42:18 -0700
>> From: wb6rse1 at mac.com
>> To: Top Band List List <topband at contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Digital modes on TB and power required
>> Message-ID: <C9E69442-3141-4A38-A05C-2BD29E827C3C at mac.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=us-ascii
>> 
>> Try that on 160 from the left coast to EU and AF and you might get very a different perspective.
>> 
>> 73 - Steve WB6RSE
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 19, 2017, at 6:14 PM, Jim Jim <wa3mej at comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>> But I have seen very very few instances when 50 watts wont get the job done EVEN on 160M.
>> 
>> High power is RARELY necessary on the lower bands.
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 02:31:32 +0000 (UTC)
>> From: HAROLD SMITH JR <w0rihps at sbcglobal.net>
>> To: "wb6rse1 at mac.com" <wb6rse1 at mac.com>,     Top Band List List
>>     <topband at contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Digital modes on TB and power required
>> Message-ID: <2090077556.3483773.1489977092492 at mail.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> 
>> Try that from the mid-west and you will have to wait, wait and wait and then wait some more.Been there, done that......................................................................................................................................................
>> 
>> 
>> Try that on 160 from the left coast to EU and AF and you might get very a different perspective.
>> 
>> 73 - Steve WB6RSE
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 19, 2017, at 6:14 PM, Jim Jim <wa3mej at comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>> But I have seen very very few instances when 50 watts wont get the job done EVEN on 160M.
>> 
>> High power is RARELY necessary on the lower bands.
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> 
>> 
>>   
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:13:50 -0500
>> From: Mike Waters <mikewate at gmail.com>
>> To: topband <topband at contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Digital modes on TB and power required
>> Message-ID:
>>     <CA+FxYXhTu4z1Njc9DnkcJUSfwfbA=tJoYjMSzret1XTx5OSeUA at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> 
>>> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 8:42 PM, <wb6rse1 at mac.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Try that on 160 from the left coast to EU and AF and you might get very a
>>> different perspective.
>>> 
>>> 73 - Steve WB6RSE
>> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 9:31 PM, HAROLD SMITH JR <w0rihps at sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Try that from the mid-west and you will have to wait, wait and wait and
>>> then wait some more. Been there, done that................................
>> Well said, Steve and Harold! That's usually true even if you have a super
>> station.
>> 
>> Maybe Jim has a better antenna system? Or a better location? We're all
>> ears, maybe we'll learn something new.
>> 
>> 73. Mike
>> www.w0btu.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 19, 2017, at 6:14 PM, Jim Jim <wa3mej at comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> But I have seen very very few instances when 50 watts wont get the job
>>> done EVEN on 160M.
>>> 
>>> High power is RARELY necessary on the lower bands.
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:57:12 -0500
>> From: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo at gmail.com>
>> To: topband at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: JT65 Power and bandwidth
>> Message-ID:
>>     <CALWD7Z5=OAo7vCZsMuEwgJ7J0nPxQ8tZidzUzMy1rSfhBS2zqQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> 
>>> FCC regs say you should use the minimum power necessary to establish
>>> communications.
>> Um, no.  Here's what it actually says:
>> 
>> 
>> ?97.313  Transmitter power standards.
>> 
>> (a) An amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power
>> necessary to carry out the desired communications.
>> 
>> 
>> Your "desired communications" are not my "desired communications."  I
>> desire solid armchair copy.  On 160 that usually means QRO.
>> 
>> 73
>> 
>> Rob
>> K5UJ
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Topband mailing list
>> Topband at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> End of Topband Digest, Vol 171, Issue 17
>> ****************************************
>> 
>> 
>>    _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> 
> 
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband