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

[Marciniak, Ed]

So is that peak or average power and if average over what time period?

Abusing the rules aside, this is a legitimate question for a digital mode without constant envelope power such as qpsk, or a digital mode with channel estimation where the system transmits during peaks and not fades with an average power over time scales of milliseconds to perhaps a few seconds. Bluetooth avoids interference around the microwave oven pulses that occur at 120 hz rate.

----- Original Message -----
From: nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net <nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net>
To: nlrs at mailman.qth.net <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tue Aug 31 14:16:51 2010
Subject: Re: [NLRS] ARRL's VUAC looking for your input - SOLP



Jon:

I replied privately early on but thought I'd share my views
publicly. There's been some good comments and much more
divergence of views than I expected.

First, to Earl, a mission of improving the contest
experience and playing field of those who DO participate in
contests is good enough for me :-) .  The 10w limit 900MHz
and above to be "LP" has been a bit of a problem.  And
that's the only problem that I see and the only part that
needs fixing. 

I like the idea of having your LP or HP designation coming
from what happens on your bottom four bands.  900 and up,
some use DEM xverters with 50w. Some are using 150w cellular
amps that are available for $35.  I think it's much too
tough to draw lines for HP/LP 900 and above when what we
really need is stations on the air on those bands.  Still
speaking of 900 and up, I find it hard to believe that an LP
op would get skunked horribly because one of his LP
competitors was running a KW on 900 and up (except for the
moon--hadn't thought about that).  So I'd like to see power
levels NOT be specified above 900 MHz.

Next, while true today that "stock" rigs put out 100w on 6,
2, and even 432, that's only recently.  Those of us who got
started in the 80's used a 25w rig to spank a 160w brick.
That IS the entry level from before.  I like the existing
200w level for LP which was trying to accommodate this.
Expanding however, just because there are now 300 and 400w
bricks, I don't think LP should encompass those because
those are hardly entry level and they are in the HP realm as
far as I'm concerned.  I mean which ops are gonna inhabit HP
if LP goes all the way to 400w??  400w to legal limit is
only ~5.9db.  I'd like to see HP be 201w to legal limit.

So, notice that my text above doesn't directly support any
of the 4 listed options :-).
I personally want option E where it grabs from Option C the
line about no power limits 900 and above and keeps the LP
limit to 200w on the bottom four bands.

Enjoying reading your opinions.
73
Bruce Richardson W9FZ



> -----Original Message-----
> From: nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of S. Earl
Jarosh
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 1:30 PM
> To: w0zq at aol.com; nlrs at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [NLRS] ARRL's VUAC looking for your input -
SOLP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon,  
> 
> I am going to answer this differently.  What is the
purpose 
> and mission of the proposals?  This question often seems
to 
<snip>

______________________________________________________________
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