"Good QRP practice"?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Gio
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

"Good QRP practice"?

Gio
Good Day Everyone,

In a recent discussion concering KX3 battery life, Wayne N6KR mentioned:

"Transceive operating time from an internal battery will be determined by
voltage or energy-density limitations of the 8 AA cells being used. You'd
probably be transmitting something like 10% of the time (good QRP
practice)."

I'm really new in amateur radio and even newer (if possible) in working QRP
with my KX1 and working on my skill set. My question is why is a 9:1 listen
to transmit ratio "good QRP practice"?

Tnx es 73

John KK4BOB

John Flynn
Tallahassee, Florida
USA
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Good QRP practice"?

Matthew Pitts
Based on my own experiences in QRP, you need to be sure of what the other person's callsign is when using less than optimal antennas, so you need to listen to be sure you have things right; I missed making a contact at lunch a few weeks ago because I didn't catch the guy's call sign the first few times he gave it.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU



________________________________
From: John Flynn <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 6:25 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] "Good QRP practice"?

Good Day Everyone,

In a recent discussion concering KX3 battery life, Wayne N6KR mentioned:

"Transceive operating time from an internal battery will be determined by
voltage or energy-density limitations of the 8 AA cells being used. You'd
probably be transmitting something like 10% of the time (good QRP
practice)."

I'm really new in amateur radio and even newer (if possible) in working QRP
with my KX1 and working on my skill set. My question is why is a 9:1 listen
to transmit ratio "good QRP practice"?

Tnx es 73

John KK4BOB

John Flynn
Tallahassee, Florida
USA
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Good QRP practice"?

Oliver Dröse
That is no "QRP problem", it is important whatever power you run to copy the
other guy's callsign. ;-))

73, Olli - DH8BQA


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Pitts" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] "Good QRP practice"?


> Based on my own experiences in QRP, you need to be sure of what the other
> person's callsign is when using less than optimal antennas, so you need to
> listen to be sure you have things right; I missed making a contact at
> lunch a few weeks ago because I didn't catch the guy's call sign the first
> few times he gave it.
>
> Matthew Pitts
> N8OHU

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Good QRP practice"?

k6dgw
In reply to this post by Gio
Good question John.  I think Wayne was proposing a "bottom line"
estimate from a somewhat more complex problem.  There are a lot of
variables to consider.  Morse code is scaled in dot-times [DT].  Dots
and inter-element spaces are 1 DT each.  Dashes are 3 DT.  Letter spaces
are 3 DT, and word spaces are nominally 7 DT [I think I've got that
right].  At any rate, if you are sending Morse code, all those spaces
are receive time [and current drain] and only the key down times are TX
drain.

What that all means in terms of steady keying depends on what you are
sending of course.  Then there is the really big factor:  When you
choose to send something vs when you choose to listen.  When you're
running 5W to a possibly compromised antenna, you will be doing quite a
bit of listening, finding the right station and right time to call.
There's no reason to call the station if he's being called by a big gun,
it just wastes your RF.  The result is, your key is actually down [i.e.
TX battery drain] in the general vicinity of 10%, give or take.

"Good QRP Practice" may be a little rigid a phrase, you're free to use
the ampere-hours in your battery any way you choose, but "successful"
QRP operation does require more listening and timing than 1.5 KW to a 6
over 6 over 6 over 6 stack on 20 meters.  If that's your station, you're
pretty much the BGOTB [Big Guy On The Band], everyone hears you.

73,

Fred K6DGW
Auburn CA

On 8/27/2011 3:25 PM, John Flynn wrote:

> I'm really new in amateur radio and even newer (if possible) in working QRP
> with my KX1 and working on my skill set. My question is why is a 9:1 listen
> to transmit ratio "good QRP practice"?
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Good QRP practice"?

AC7AC
In reply to this post by Gio
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.