Author: Alan Dewey via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 16:09:59 -0400
I agree with the comment made earlier on this list (by N5DO I believe) that antennas make a much bigger difference than 50 watts of power. I've never been that bothered by the 150W rule for ARRL cont
Al ? if you are someone who going to cheat, you probably are not reading this reflector anyway. Whatever we write will have no effect on such folks. I suspect they are in a parallel universe. Tod, K0
Al, Since all the popular radios will run 100w, I think the power limit should be 100w. Those who have 200 watt radios can turn them down, just like they would in CQ WW. Sure, antennas "can" make mor
You know, of course, that ultimately, it doesn't matter. There will always be SOMEONE complaining about the rules. Case in point: My club runs a local 2 meter simplex contest every January. We origin
When did this thread become a discussion on changing the ARRL low power definition? As someone who has entered the low power category I happen to like the 150w limit and my transceiver has no problem
Move closer to salt water. K1TN/4 _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
A few comments on this ever expanding topic. I believe the CQWW 160 contests also have a 150W power limit now, if I am not mistaken. I personally think the extra 50W does matter but honestly whicheve
No way Jim! We are having lots of fun from the west side of PA! Stan is right! Finding even 0.7 dB more would be HUGE! I am rebuilding the 15 meter run stack now - lots of work and the net gain impro