[NLRS] ARRL's VUAC looking for your input - SOLP

[Marciniak, Ed]

Should the »10w output of a stock transceiver on 432 put you into a higher power class?

Putting the eme stations in same class as people with 100-170w bricks isn't fair either.

That is why C is a good option.

It best reflects the three types of stations likely to be encountered. I suppose that does put QRP in with stock. There is some sense to three tiers with around 6-10 db power difference between them.

----- Original Message -----
From: nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net <nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net>
To: NLRS Reflector <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tue Aug 31 10:48:49 2010
Subject: Re: [NLRS] ARRL's VUAC looking for your input - SOLP



I have a problem with proposal C as the power levels goes beyond what SOLP is 
really about.... true weak signal work. The idea of power levels in this 
category is too improve the system to get the most out of the antenna system. 
This means using the best feedline for most RF out and the most efficient 
antenna system for more ERP. 


Creating a STOCK class is novel idea, but SOLP does just that. If people truly 
want more power, then move up to SOHP class. When I contest, I don't use the 
current max on 6m and 2m. I do well in my opinion. 


Proposal B is more inline to bring new comers to contesting. The power levels in 
this proposal fits with most stock levels. There's always QRP (<=10w).

Just my 2 cents,
Chris Salinas
N0TTW


      
______________________________________________________________
NLRS mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html