Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Power

To: <Topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Power
From: "Guy Olinger, K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 09:37:50 -0400
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
In the discussion about "benefits" of higher and higher power...

Broadcasters are not concerned about reciprocity, e.g. two-way QSO's.  An 
extra 10 db in signal can make use of paths with less reliability for lower 
powers and be heard in the distant receiver.  The broadcaster does not get 
paid to listen for a "R" from the other end.  This is only one of the reasons 
that propagation predictions based on VOACAP sometimes do not serve amateur 
radio purposes.

Particularly on a noisey band -- 160 may be gentlemen's band, but a haven for 
QRN -- higher power can open up a path one-way that cannot be reversed even 
with the best receiving antennas, unless the return is running at an even 
higher power.

In the end the great undiscovered country is how to detect a discreet CW 
signal well down into the noise, or another quantum jump in RX antennas.  Or 
how to apply technology to enhance some aspect of the signal to make it easier 
for our ears to detect it.

So far all the noise reduction I have heard drops the almost copiable stuff as 
noise, giving the operator no clue that the signal is there or clipping 
elements of characters that renders the CW less copiable than without.

The real improvements in 2 way won't come out of my power bill, they'll come 
out of my RX and antenna budget.

73, Guy.

 


_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>