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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 7 , Jun 13, 2013
    View Source
    • 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.