The notion that there is no difference between 100 watts and 200 watts is
flawed. There is a little over 3dB difference, which often makes the difference
between a QSO, albeit a rough one, and no QSO at all. I have many QSL cards
that I would not have, if I had been limited to 100 watts.
I've tried it over and over. When the band is just coming up or going out,
when the QRM or QRN is high, I've switched between 200 and 100 watts, and it
made the difference between being copied and not being copied.
Signal to noise ratio depends on the signal strength and the noise power. If
100 watts puts you at or just under the noise level, 200 watts will result in a
copyable signal. True, if 100 watts gives you S9 at the distant end, then 200
watts won't make any useful difference. But most of my DX contacts, especially
the rare ones, have been other than S9. If you choose to operate 100 watts for
the challenge, good for you. But there is a difference.
In addition, when I run 50 watts on RTTY with a 100-watt transmitter, I have
to be very careful about duty cycle and giving the finals a rest. When I run 50
watts with my 200-watt transmitter, I don't.
73,
Frank
KF6E
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Christensen
Sent: 08/30/11 07:53 AM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] What Radio?
> Besides receiver specs, the '5000 runs 200 watts out, which often means >
> the difference between a manageable QSO and none, compared with 100 watts.
> I've mostly considered the 200-watt feature as a Madison Avenue marketing
> gimmick. This appeals to folks who only live in a linear world (i.e., if one
> is good, two is twice as good). We could make the same argument when going
> from 50 to 100 watts, and 500 watts to 1KW.
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|