Voted, but think we should set a limit for the amp power.

On Nov 5, 2020 at 01:06, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:

A new poll has been created:

Hi all,

 

Hans has allowed me to setup a poll about the QCX Challenge/QSO Party

 

My personal observation is that not too many people really participate in the Challenge (very strange, with more than 11000 QCX's sold ...). Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I also noticed that some of the regulars (e.g. GM0EUL, OK2BQN) were not spotted during the QCX QRO sessions, they probably have no amplifier and so weren't there.

 

So I made a suggestion to join both sessions, QRP & QRO into one monthly session (each last monday), with a new , but still simple scoring system.

 

See http://www.qrp-labs.com/party.html, for the rules as they are now.

Note that in the QRP session, a QCX + amplifier does NOT count for 3 points.

 

The new scoring would be:

 

- Only ops using a QCX can put their scores online and claim points

- Working any non-QCX station is 1 point

- Working another QCX, but one or both stations are using an amplifier, is 3 points

- QCX to QCX and BOTH are "true" QRP is 5 points

 

Hans would prefer to let "the masses speak", hence this poll. Make your VOTE count!

 

73,

 

Luc ON7DQ/KF0CR

1. I like it as it is, I want no change
2. I prefer ONE session a month, mixing QRP and QRO, with the new scoring
3. I prefer TWO sessions a month (I have a lot of spare time), also mixing QRP and QRO in both sessions, with the new scoring
4. I don't care, I stuffed my QCX under a mattress

Vote Now

Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls only through the group's website.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 08:39 AM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
Hi,
In the USA there is already a power limit of 1500 watts. Just saying. I
am guessing you have some other, lower power level in mind. I would
offer a previous "QRP" level of 100 watts as a starting place for
discussion of such a limit. I do not own a QCX (yet) so won't be in the
"contests with one. You can bet the farm that IF I join with something
else it won't be running 1500 or even 100 watts.
73,
Bill KU8H
bark less - wag more
On 11/5/20 8:28 AM, N3MNT wrote:
Voted, but think we should set a limit for the amp power.
Yes lower power level.  I have a high power QRO radio when I want it but I enjoy the challenge of working others with 5W or less hence I have several QCX+.  With out a reasonable limit ( 50W) it will spoil the event for the pure QRP operators..

Bill

For some 50 KW would be QRP.  For others anything above 50 MW would be QRO.

Seems that the difference between QRP and QRO is so poorly defined that it could 

be almost anything.

Is QRP actually ERP (effective radiated power) or power into the final amplifier?

I did a Google search for "QRP versus QRO" and now am really confused.

Arv

_._

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:14 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote:

Hi,

So the conversation is down to what power level is 'reasonable'. I agree
that around about 50 watts seems reasonable. I doubt anybody with a five
watt rig feels despoiled just because there are other amateurs on the
air with a kilowatt. I never felt that way when I used a two-watt radio.
Scoring should be less for use of more than five watts and a lot less
for 100 watts (or more).

In my experience the really high power licensees won't 'bother'
themselves listening for weaker signals and therefore won't bother about
working the QCX events.

Of course, it is a "QCX Challenge" so maybe refuse contacts with anybody
else regardless of power level. I do have some QRP Labs bits here - but
not a QCX.

73,

Bill  KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/5/20 9:10 AM, N3MNT wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 08:39 AM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     In the USA there is already a power limit of 1500 watts. Just saying. I
>     am guessing you have some other, lower power level in mind. I would
>     offer a previous "QRP" level of 100 watts as a starting place for
>     discussion of such a limit. I do not own a QCX (yet) so won't be in the
>     "contests with one. You can bet the farm that IF I join with something
>     else it won't be running 1500 or even 100 watts.
>
>     73,
>
>     Bill KU8H
>
>     bark less - wag more
>
>     On 11/5/20 8:28 AM, N3MNT wrote:
>
>         Voted, but think we should set a limit for the amp power.
>
>
> Yes lower power level.  I have a high power QRO radio when I want it but
> I enjoy the challenge of working others with 5W or less hence I have
> several QCX+.  With out a reasonable limit ( 50W) it will spoil the
> event for the pure QRP operators..
>

Just for clarity:
On the website http://www.qrp-labs.com/party.html <http://www.qrp-labs.com/party.html>, only the *QRP* event is mentioned (last monday of the month).
That's how it all started.
The QRO session was only mentioned by Hans in this newsgroup, and takes place "somewhere halfway" in the month, but there is no clear definition of "when" on the website. That's probably intentional, to check who's awake and reading the messages ....
So, whatever the outcome of the poll, the site will have to be updated.
As for power, pse let's keep it reasonable, and not make it too complicated.
The QCX Challenge is not a contest, and "in the spirit of QRP Labs", I guess we're not talking kW's of power here.
Anything "around" 50W should be considered  a level playing field, 25W is -3dB, 100W is + 3dB ... all good.
But if you really must ... no one will stop you from using a kiloWatt.
And QRP ?
Also no nitpicking please ... 5W is QRP (referring to a "barefoot" QCX rig), but if you get 6W out of your QCX, good for you ... there is always some coax loss isn't there ? ;-)
73,
Luc ON7DQ/KF0CR

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...>
Date: November 5, 2020 at 5:02 PM

Jim

My comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, even though attempts at on-line

humor usually fail.

It is usually interesting to find an obviously QRO station operating in a QRP area

and send "QRO?" (can you increase power). After a couple of requests for more

power they usually QSY. 8-)

Yes, I am a QRP bigot. Like UNIX and Linux code, less is more!

Arv

_._

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jim Morgan < W4QE@...> wrote:

Hi Arv & all,

Don't worry about a technical definition for "QRP" and "QRO" with respect to transmit watts or ERP. As you point out, it's relative - what is QRO to one operator may be QRP to another.

The origin comes from the early Q-signals: QRP ? == "Can you reduce power ?" (or in the affirmative: QRP == "Please reduce your power"). Likewise, QRO ? means "Can you increase power ?"

I don't think that people started referring to low-power transmitters as "QRP rigs" until maybe the time of the Heathkit HW-7/HW-8. It was also around then that homebrewers started building small low-power rigs.

Luc ON7DQ/KF0CR had a good response - "QRP" has generally come to mean a transmit power of around 5 watts, more or less. I don't think anyone is picky about whether this refers to input power, output power or ERP. I don't think there is a convention for "QRO" in terms of watts. With respect to your QCX, the ham running a commercial rig with a power around 100W would be QRO, but from his perspective, someone would probably need to run a kilowatt to be QRO.

Just my humble opinion!

Have fun & 73,

Jim W4QE

On 11/5/2020 12:31 PM, Arv Evans wrote:

Bill

For some 50 KW would be QRP. For others anything above 50 MW would be QRO.

Seems that the difference between QRP and QRO is so poorly defined that it could

be almost anything.

Is QRP actually ERP (effective radiated power) or power into the final amplifier?

I did a Google search for "QRP versus QRO" and now am really confused.

Arv

_._

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:14 AM Bill Cromwell < wrcromwell@...> wrote:

Hi,

So the conversation is down to what power level is 'reasonable'. I agree
that around about 50 watts seems reasonable. I doubt anybody with a five
watt rig feels despoiled just because there are other amateurs on the
air with a kilowatt. I never felt that way when I used a two-watt radio.
Scoring should be less for use of more than five watts and a lot less
for 100 watts (or more).

In my experience the really high power licensees won't 'bother'
themselves listening for weaker signals and therefore won't bother about
working the QCX events.

Of course, it is a "QCX Challenge" so maybe refuse contacts with anybody
else regardless of power level. I do have some QRP Labs bits here - but
not a QCX.

73,

Bill KU8H

bark less - wag more

On 11/5/20 9:10 AM, N3MNT wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 08:39 AM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In the USA there is already a power limit of 1500 watts. Just saying. I
> am guessing you have some other, lower power level in mind. I would
> offer a previous "QRP" level of 100 watts as a starting place for
> discussion of such a limit. I do not own a QCX (yet) so won't be in the
> "contests with one. You can bet the farm that IF I join with something
> else it won't be running 1500 or even 100 watts.
>
> 73,
>
> Bill KU8H
>
> bark less - wag more
>
> On 11/5/20 8:28 AM, N3MNT wrote:
>
> Voted, but think we should set a limit for the amp power.
>
>
> Yes lower power level. I have a high power QRO radio when I want it but
> I enjoy the challenge of working others with 5W or less hence I have
> several QCX+. With out a reasonable limit ( 50W) it will spoil the
> event for the pure QRP operators..
>