[CW] Etiquette question...(now longer)

Thu, 22 May 2003 13:19:19 -0500

David, one last note from me on this topic and then no more . . .

You still are promoting the viewpoint that anyone who runs "QRP" is somehow
lacking in mentality, equipment, money, judgment or whatever.

That is not only incorrect, it is demeaning and insulting to the majority of
QRP operators.

David, you are just off base on this one, condemning an entire facet of
amateur radio because they annoy you in your quest for signals worthy of
"passing traffic" when you have no more traffic to pass.

Most of us are rather well educated; many of us have graduate degrees in EE,
physics, and the like; many of us either worked or still do as professional
communications engineers; we are, for the most part, able to afford to run a
big amp if we choose; many of us *do* use a 100-watt transceiver cranked
down to 5 watts for our QRP activities; and on and on. And we are not
reluctant to crank up the power when it is required.

You have a very simple solution to your problem of weak signals: don't have
anything to do with them. Amateur radio for 99.999% of the time is not
concerned with passing traffic, but I sense that your acceptable performance
level is instinctively still based upon that standard from your professional
days.

I, too, once held the mindset that you have re QRP operation. I never ran
less than 100 watts and for the past 13 years have been in a location where
an amp was not a good idea. But years ago, I ran SB-220 amps at full bore
and wished for more, as well as a taller tower.

But, the more I heard and read of this QRP business, starting a few years
ago, the less I believed what I was being told. So, I starting listening
around the "watering holes" at 7040 and 14060. Sure enough, there were a few
signals "down there" in the noise but for the most part, I could not tell
much difference from the sound of the band elsewhere. I cranked the big rig
down to 5 watts and sure enough, I could work people and still get 579
reports!

As time went on, I learned more about QRP operations and mainly about the
mindset and the people involved. In nearly 58 years of ham radio, the last 4
have been my best due to my association with QRP people and participation in
QRP events.

Limiting one's self to 5 watts is a great leveler in that the most $$ does
not always do the best job or win the prize. I have no doubt you have the
skill and experience required to dig those weak ones out of the noise, but
my point is that very few of the QRP signals I have encountered over the
years are anywhere near the noise!
QRP does not equate to signals in the noise.

If weak signals are abhorrent to you, just ignore them. But, don't be
surprised if a lot of those S7 and above signals are running 5 watts. And I
won't go into the dB comparisons beyond reminding you that if you believe in
the "6 dB per S-unit" myth, then 5 watts is only 13 dB or a little over two
S-units below 100 watts.

So, if 100 watts produces an S9 signal, you can expect to get an S7 signal
from a five-watter with a comparable antenna. Not too shabby. My typical QRP
CW contact is with a station who is registering from S5 to S9 on my PRO2
S-meter and who frequently is comfortable copy on a speaker.

If you have in mind that the typical QRPer runs 200 mW from  a little
homemade transmitter in an Altoids tin, you have correctly identified a
small but enthusiastic segment of the QRP group. There are entire
single-band superhet transceivers capable of a watt or two output in similar
containers. But that is just a part of the QRP movement.

QRP is one thing and one thing only: operation with a maximum output of 5
watts from the transmitter - any transmitter, any antenna. I personally use
the best equipment I can afford (IC-765, IC-756PRO, IC-756PRO2, and Elecraft
K2) for QRP work. I am limited to wire antennas and verticals.

Others prefer the smaller homebrew and kit-built affairs. But we all have to
do the best we can with 5 watts, and there is where the operator skill and
experience comes into the act in spades.

We hold contests weekly during parts of the year called Fox Hunts in which
stations all over the country attempt to work a pair of stations (the
"Foxii") with everyone running a maximum of 5 watts. I have heard 500 mW
stations that cause my S-meter to hit S7-9 with perfect copy despite the
noise and much QRM.

The old commercial line was "Try it - you'll like it!" Spend an hour or two
around 14060 starting at 2230Z on June 1 (Sunday afternoon/evening) and
listen to the first 20-meter Summer Fox Hunt for 2003. You will hear from
100 to 300 stations trying to work two Fox stations.

One Fox will be in the 60-65 range while the other will be somewhere in the
55-60 range. Notice the signal strengths you hear - copy the exchanges and
you will learn the power being run by each station. Compare the scene with
any major DX pileup you ever heard.

Better yet, crank back the power knob to 5 watts and jump in and see if you
can work the Foxii! There is far more here than meets the eye (ear?),
believe me!

Hopefully, you will hear the old Yellow Rose in there with the mob getting a
couple of Fox pelts. Last year, 5 watts resulted in working 39 of the 40
Foxii, and our Fox Hunting team won nationally with 191 out of 200 possible
contacts. All on 5 watts . . .

Enough from me, David, but you are by implication putting down a group of
wonderful hams and people and failing to experience what could be a new
facet of amateur radio that could change your own outlook - I know that it
did mine when ham radio was becoming a real drag after over 50 years of the
same old stuff.

73/72, George
Amateur Radio W5YR -  the Yellow Rose of Texas
Fairview, TX 30 mi NE of Dallas in Collin county EM13QE
"In the 57th year and it just keeps getting better!"
<mailto:[email protected]>

----- Original Message -----
From: "David J. Ring Jr - N1EA" <[email protected]>
To: "W2AGN" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [CW] Etiquette question...

> If you're working these guys through any type of competition like a pile
up,
> your not talking about the same weak signals that I am.
>
> Brute force sometimes works, but just plain brute force doesn't work well
> without some brains.

<snip>

> As is not running power when you need it.
>
> 73
>
> David Ring
> N1EA