Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: how much power is appropriate on 6 meters JT9?

Expand Messages
  • John
    Lets not confuse Weak signal with Low power A typical single hop sporadicE opening on 6M will produce very strong high-angle signals,so a simple dipole
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 13, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Lets not confuse "Weak signal" with "Low power"

      A typical single hop sporadicE opening on 6M will produce very strong high-angle signals,so a simple dipole antenna and low power is often sufficient.
      But with such strong signals, why not use SSB?

      When the Es "season" is over and propogation is reduced to weak troposcatter, thats when JT9 comes into its own.
      You may then also need a better antenna and a bit more power.

      JT9 works fine on 6M, but does not like any doppler spread caused by multipath or meteor reflections,
      - ISCAT-B or JT6M will perform better in those conditions.

      John
      GW4MBN


      --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas F Giella W4HM" <w4hm@...> wrote:
      >
      > No matter the 6 meter radio wave propagation mode or conditions 5 watts is
      > all that you need with JT9 to make a successful QSO. I make many 6 meter
      > QSO's using JT-9 with as little as 1 watt.
      >
      > 1500 watts, even 100 watts would more than likely wipe out the waterfall
      > for most ham's on the receiving end.
      >
      > Just my .05 cents due to inflation.
      >
      > 73 & GUD DX,
      > Thomas F. Giella W4HM
      > Lakeland, FL, USA
      > w4hm@...
      >
      > BARTG #8531
      > PODXS 070 #349
      > FELD HELD #141
      > 30MDG # 691
      > DMC #1243
      > WARC-CC #20
      >
      > W4HM Amateur Radio & SWL Autobiography: http://www.w4hm.org
      >
    • Jim Brown
      ... When that happens, the receiving station may need a better receiver. There are detailed reviews of the technical capabilities of most currently available
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 13, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On 6/13/2013 10:26 AM, Thomas F Giella W4HM wrote:
        > 1500 watts, even 100 watts would more than likely wipe out the waterfall
        > for most ham's on the receiving end.

        When that happens, the receiving station may need a better receiver.

        There are detailed reviews of the technical capabilities of most
        currently available transceivers on the ARRL website, as well as on Rob
        Sherwood's website.

        I agree completely with Lance -- the WSJT modes are WEAK SIGNAL modes,
        NOT QRP modes. Signals can be weak because the propagation path is
        difficult, or because the stations involved have poor antennas, or
        because they CHOOSE to run QRP. One of the principal uses of WSJT modes
        is to work paths that have VERY high losses, and need the combination of
        high power, great antennas, and the noise immunity of these modes to
        have a chance of making a QSO.

        A station running high power as two obligations -- to stay out of the
        way of others already using a given frequency, and by keeping their
        transmitted signal CLEAN. Most rigs that get blown away be strong
        signals also put out dirty signals -- that is, they take up more than
        their share of bandwidth.

        To have a clean signal, we must have a clean transceiver, a clean power
        amp, and we must carefully tune the power amp for minimum distortion.
        This is an obligation. Running QRP is a CHOICE, not a requirement.

        73, Jim K9YC
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.