AmateurRadio.com

I see that Pacificon has organized a Digital Dinner this evening.

I suppose it will be a bit of this and a byte of that.

I’ll get my coat…

10m WSPR spots @ G4ILO 12 October 2012

Not a very lively day’s catch but some good propagation in evidence. Two-way spots with EA8FF and 4X1RF seem to be a regular occurrence. More noteworthy are two-way spots with PY2SDR and K1UTI.

Just a reminder that G4ILO is using 2W to an attic dipole.

Over on the Elecraft KX3 Yahoo group an argument has been raging as to whether running low power into a tower-mounted beam is QRP. Some folk feel that QRP also means using simple no-gain wire antennas. Others argue strongly that using an antenna with gain is a perfectly valid way to do more with less, that “less” relates to power and nothing else.

On his QRP – Do more with less blog, Larry W2LJ nails his colours (colors?) firmly to the mast. Saying those who use towers and beams aren’t QRP is baloney, claims Larry.

Personally, I think QRP is whatever the ARRL, G-QRP Club, QRPARCI or CQ Contest committee says it is. If you are competing in one of their contests or applying for one of their awards you must follow their rules. And the only limitation they specify for the QRP category is power level. So I don’t think it is possible to win an argument that QRP includes any other restriction besides low power. But I can understand why some people feel that those who have a lot of aluminium in the air have an advantage over those who only use a piece of wire and that lumping them into the same category is unfair.

To really put the cat among the pigeons does the spirit of QRP include the use of store-bought or kit-built equipment too? I certainly feel that the art of QRP is strongly allied to the practise of home-brew, but I still claim to be QRP when operating my FT-817, KX3 or K2. Should the ham who operates an Elecraft KX3 belong in the same class as one who uses a two-transistor Pixie?

Perhaps we need a new term to define this kind of minimalist operation?

Welcome, everyone to Episode #092 of Linux in the Ham Shack. In order to bring some more Linux users into the fold, we spend some time addressing issues pertinent to them. The first segment discusses some useful video and photo editing software that might be of interest to anyone, ham radio operator or not. The second segment discusses the ease of getting into the amateur radio hobby and how computer enthusiasts can use that shiny new license to expand their computing horizons. Third and finally, we respond to listener feedback. Catch you in a couple of weeks for the next go-around.

73 de The LHS Guys

There’s a couple of threads going on the KX3 e-mail reflector today. One is titled “QRP Baloney” and the other “QRP Sausage”.  Both threads are a “discussion” trying to determine what QRP “really is”.

I, for one, originally thought that QRP was making sure your transmitter put out 100 Watts or less. Well, that was back in the “Ancient Times”, in the Mesozoic Era when I originally joined QRP ARCI.

Somewhere along the line, that changed and the definition of QRP became a power output of no more than 5 Watts for CW and 10 Watts for SSB.

I am fine with that definition. Period.

Now we have some purveyors of bologna that are insisting that QRP means “5 Watts with ONLY simple, non-gain type antennas”.  Wow!

Somehow it’s not in the “Spirit of QRP” to do as much as you possibly can with that 5 or 10 Watts.

Really?

For the record, my antennas (currently – might add a W3EDP soon) are simple, and non-gain – a Butternut HF9V ground mounted vertical and an 88′ Extended Double Zepp wire . But while I am sleeping tonight, if the Angel of the Lord appears in a dream and says, “Lawrence, the Father has decided that you have truly been a good and faithful servant lately.  In appreciation, when you wake up tomorrow morning, in your backyard He will provide a 40 foot tower with a multi-band Yagi mounted at the top”.

What? Am I supposed to say, “Dear St. Michael (or Gabriel or Raphael – whatever), I am a QRP Purist – could you tell the Lord to make that a Buddipole instead”?

No …. I don’t think so.

The concept of QRP is to limit your power output.  If you take that 5 or 10 Watts and pump them into an antenna “fire hose” so that you SOUND like you’re pumping out a kW, then I say “Bravo for you”.  The true “Spirit of QRP” is “doing more with less” – taking those Watts that you’re using, and with a combination of good operating skill and the best antenna you can muster, putting out the best signal that you possibly can.  That’s it – no more, no less.

If you listen to the purveyors of bologna, I guess they would also tell you that a guy pumping 500 Watts into a 6 inch piece of copper at ground level is actually QRP.

No …… that would just be stupid.

72 de Larry W2LJ
QRP – When you care to send the very least! (But take the pains to make it sound like the very most!)