[SixClub] c. m. pinneke-w5cmp3347@verizon.net

[Howard Bingham]

At 04:14 PM 4/15/2006, you wrote:
>Not that I agree or dissagree with QRP/QRO, but let me tell you it 
>is nice to actually hear a station well, without the struggle of 
>turning up the volume, falling out of a tree installing the antenna 
>higher, paying more for coax, because now your antenna is farther 
>away, and or buying a better radio (which seems subjective to who 
>believes is better?)  QRP is exciting to the QRP'er because he 
>doesn't really have to listen to a weak signal.  And QRO, well I 
>guess I am jealous, can't really afford it, with electricity bills 
>getting higher and higher, and again, the need for better coax to 
>handle all the power properly.
>
>I run a hundred watts and a five element beam at 20 feet.  It works 
>for me just fine when the band is open...
>
>Jeff
>KA2BKG
--

Meanwhile as my mobile 6m normally capable of 100 watts sits in the 
shop (Possibly with a burned final.)

Howard Bingham
KE5APJ

--


>From: doc <kd4e at verizon.net>
>Date: Fri Apr 14 15:29:02 CDT 2006
>To: World Wide Six Meter Club <sixclub at mailman.qth.net>
>Subject: Re: [SixClub] c. m. pinneke-w5cmp3347 at verizon.net
>
> > Oh, ye of little faith!
> > 72   VE7VIE/WV2J
> >
> >> lifes too short for qrp.73
> >> w5cmp3347
>
>How about both?
>
>Use QRO to make the contact then move down
>to QRP to discover how good an operator you
>are and how good your rig & antenna combo is?
>
>Anyone can power their way to a contact,
>consider the huge power being run by some of
>our fellow Hams south of the border, but the
>best operators respect the FCC requirement
>that we use "the least power necessary".
>
>And yes, that FCC requirement was in the test
>we all had to pass prior to receiving a Ham
>license.  :-)
>
>--
>Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e   bibleseven.com
--