[PaQSO] QRP Operations

Wed, 23 Oct 2002 19:37:57 -0400

Aha!  That explains it!

I was looking through some of the old results earlier (while researching
another matter) and I got to wondering where certain familiar calls had
disappeared to.  I'd wondered what had happened to you Bob, now I know!

Besides, anytime someone suggests I get a nice short vanity call, I can just
blame you for taking MY initials first! <g>

73, ron wn3vaw
"Be who you are, say what you think, people that matter don't care, and
people that care don't matter." -- Dr. Seuss

----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Nygren <[email protected]>
To: Bob Crossland <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Mike' <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 7:01 PM
Subject: Re: [PaQSO] QRP Operations

Mike et Al,
    A couple of years ago, I traded in WA3YON for N3RN for one reason, A
nice
short snappy call on CW. (OK, being it was my initials was a factor also!)
If I
send N3RN/QRP the advantage of the 1X2 is lost. Additionally when CQing, it
would reduce the number of calls I make by one-half. (It takes twice as long
to
send).
    Same on phone, a short callsign just seems to works better. If I don't
work
someone after two calls, I move on. I'll get them next time! When CQing, the
short call reduces fatigue.  Besides, when I did the math, a 5 watt signal
is
really not that much weaker than a 100 watts.
    And I also work the /M guys first !

Regards!

Bob N3RN

Bob Crossland wrote:

> Mike, I can say without hesitation that when I hear /QRP or /M, I give
them
> immediate priority.  If I asked a /M or a /QRP to stand by, I would be
> embarrassed to say so, unless of course another medium power station
advised
> that they had priority traffic for whatever reason.
>
> The next rather obvious statement is, if you are in fact operating /QRP or
> /M and don't sign with those designators, don't expect priority treatment.
> Again, that should go without saying.  My opinion, go with the /Q or /M.
> You are right however in that chances are I will comment, on SSB only,
what
> a nice signal you have, assuming you in fact do have a strong signal.
>
> Regarding the thread about Rover, Mobile and Portable ops, I've been
> Portable for the PaQP since getting my license in 1991 but I have to say,
> listening to what the mobile and rover folks go through, I think I'm quite
> satisfied with Portable.  Don't get me wrong.  To be competitive, it takes
a
> lot of planning, and quite a few hours of execution to put together a
really
> effective Portable operation, and I would be the last one to minimize the
> efforts required.  But again, the Rover and Mobile headaches to be dealt
> with make you folks a really special breed.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Bob, N3FR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:32 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [PaQSO] QRP Operations
>
> As long as we are stirring the pot a bit I'll put this out to the group.
> The last two years I have operated the party QRP.  As a QRP station I sign
> /QRP in both SSB and CW.  I always tended to think this was the way to do
it
> when operating and collecting bonus for it.  I am a poor cw operator at
> best, so I am not as competitive in this category as I should be, but it
> keeps the neighbors from calling and complaining.
>
> I have noticed most QRP stations don't sign as such.  By not doing so
> exchanges are shortened resulting in more time over the contest period for
> qso's.  Additionally you wouldn't be asked questions such as, How much
> power? & What antenna?  When the bands are good this would result in a
> higher rate of qso's per hour.
>
> Additionally I must add that it would be easy to operate at 100 watts and
> then claim QRP at the end.  The difference to listener on a good band is
> slight but during a contest the  additional power and resulting 2-3 S
Units
> increase makes a big difference.  Hopefully this hasn't occurred but if
you
> don't sign QRP no one would ever question your signal during or after the
> party.
>
> After considering these things if not a requirement next year if I do QRP
I
> don't think I'll sign it.  Although a few times in the party stations did
> put at the head of the line due to my QRP signing I think the times
savings
> would be more beneficial.
>
> Mike, N3BUD
>
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
> or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed.
> Please post in Plain-Text only.---
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso

_______________________________________________
PaQSO mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso