That is what I kinda like about VHF/UHF. The slower pace! I believe
that society has gotten too fast paced and everyone "wants it now".
That is what led me to VHF/UHF and QRP...the effort put into getting
the Q, whether it is building better antennae, doing better
engineering on the entire system...or what ever makes t getting that Q
much more gratifiying. To this day my most memorable QSO was with
K1TEO in FN31 from my QTH in FM19 on CW with 5 watts to a single Par
Omni-angle in my attic on 70cms. Definately speaks more for Jeff's
ears than my signal....but boy it was worth the effort. Of course I
am speaking for myself.
73,
--
Jeff Embry, K3OQ
FM19je
ARCI #11643, FPQRP #-696,
QRP-L # 67, NAQCC #25
AMSAT LM-2263
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large
number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
On 2/28/07, Dan_K9ZF <n9rla@yahoo.com> wrote:
> While I agree that dipoles and loops work, and are much better than no
> antenna, I would hesitate to recommend them to "new VHF+" ops.
>
> I think the many hours of white noise between QSO's keeps a lot of the
> new hams away from weak signal stuff. And using compromise antennas
> systems will increase these hours considerably.
>
> Put up what you can. But realize that more antenna equals more QSO's.
>
> 73
> Dan
> --
> K9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269
> Check out the Rover Resource Page at: <http://www.qsl.net/n9rla>
> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-books
> Ask me how to join the Indiana Ham Mailing list!
>
>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|