Sounds like time to advise the FCC of inteference from a poor signal. Yes -
it IS their job.
Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.
moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leigh L Klotz, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Here's a silly thought.
> Last year there was an OM about 6 miles from me who regularly ran 250W
> on PSK. In QSO after QSO, he was told he had RF feedback in his signal,
> he he pointedly ignored it all, saying he had a clean signal and wasn't
> overdriving, and it was all just poor receiver front ends. It
> wasn't...the RF was a big problem, and his signal covered over 1KHz.
> 73,
> Leigh/WA5ZNU
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 4:51 pm, Brian A wrote:
> > "There is no need to run 1000 watts" is just plain wrong.
> >
> > It depends upon what your're trying to do.
> >
> > If you're trying to make a QSO with a station half a world away under
> > tough propogation conditions, it may indeed be necessary. 1000 watts
> > may be the minimum power required to make the contact.
> >
> > PSK and other digital contacts are good for DXCC digital credit. For
> > example, some people did indeed work one of the VU4 dxpedition
> > stations half a world away using PSK. It did take them a lot of power.
> > It was legit to do so. Contests are also legit. Ragchewing isn't the
> > only activity digital modes can be used for.
> >
> > I agree if you're intent on only working easy paths than 20-50 watts
> > is mostly OK. That's not what everybody wants to do. The only reg
> > requirements are min power necessary a clean transmitted signal and no
> > intentional interference.
> >
> > Also there is no relationship between transmitted power and
> > distortion. A KW can be clean and 2 watts can be dirty. You can't
> > tell from a waterfall that somebody is running too much power for a
> > given path. A clean 2 watts from across the street can look pretty
> > dirty if your RX can't handle the signal without RX overload.
> >
> > The expectation that one is going to sit there day in and day out with
> > a wide RX filter and not be bothered by other stations is unrealistic.
> > This is a shared frequency hobby.
> >
> > Putting the blame on the other guy and trying to "reform him" isn't
> > the answer. The answer is to make YOUR station as bullet proof to
> > intefering signals as possible. That means narrow filters will often
> > be necessary. It means knowing how to use passband tuning, notches,
> > AGC, RF gain control and whatever other technology you can throw at it.
> >
> > QRM is part of the hobby. Digital modes are not immune or exempt.
> >
> > Quit crying and accept reality.
> >
> > de K3KO
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Lew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have been running PSK for severial years, I run around 20 - 25
> > watts, with
> >> the ALC just starting to move
> >> My IMD report is around -32. and the fan runs very little
> >> I have tried running 50 Watts and after a few min. the fan is
> > running at
> >> full speed and the radio is hot.
> >>
> >> CW or voice are 50% duty cycle (not always xmitting at power set
> >> point)
> >> PSK and other digital modes on the other hand always has a tone being
> >> xmitted. ie 100% duty cycle.
> >>
> >> I have talked to stations with sidebands and they were running around
> >> 100Watts
> >> had them cut the power to 20 - 30 watts, the side bands were gone,
> > their IMD
> >> got much better
> >> and I could still copy them with no problems.
> >>
> >> I run a TS-2000 to a dipole and as a rule if I can hear them I can
> > contact
> >> them.
> >>
> >> so much for high power with PSK or other digital modes
> >>
> >> just my 2 cents
> >>
> >> Lew N4HRA
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Roger J. Buffington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 10:56
> >> Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Here's a silly thought.
> >>
> >>
> >> > Danny Douglas wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Absolutely spot on Erick. That is one reason that we try to tell
> >> new
> >> >> people, on the digital bands, to start with as few watts as they
> > can.
> >> >> There is just no reason to run 100 watts ( and I expect some run
> >> >> more) on the PSK, etc. digital modes. Everytime I say that though,
> >> >> someone jumps in the middle and says that a well adjusted signal,
> >> >> blah blah blah, wont cause problems. Ive been told to get a
> > receiver:
> >> >> get a rig: get a filter, etc. I have all three thank you - but
> >> that
> >> >> doesnt mean that the person transmitting such signals is not
> >> >> responisble to the amateur code and should not run the "minimum
> > power
> >> >> needed to make contacts". One can almost always tell who is
> > exceeding
> >> >> necessary power, just from the view on the waterfalls. When one
> >> >> signal out of 20 appears 4 time brighter, and has traces above and
> >> >> below their main signal for half the width of the waterfall,
> > they are
> >> >> exceeding power badly. Especially with PSK, many of us use
> >> broadband
> >> >> copy software, so we can see and copy every signal on the band
> > at the
> >> >> same time. With one of those signals, I see the same station
> >> readout
> >> >> on a dozen or more channels of that window. Often, they just
> > wipe out
> >> >> everyone else.
> >> >
> >> > There is never an excuse for running an unclean signal on PSK or any
> >> > other mode, i.e. with sidebands, etc. In fact, this is a violation
> >> of
> >> > Part 97 and analogous regulations in other countries that require a
> >> > signal to conform (more or less) to the state-of-the-art as regards
> >> > purity.
> >> >
> >> > On the other hand, it is a myth that PSK only requires 20 or 30
> >> watts
> >> > for effective communication. This is no more true of PSK than it
> > is of
> >> > the ultimate digital mode, CW. The laws of physics control all,
> >> and a
> >> > signal using more power will *sometimes* get through when a signal
> > using
> >> > 20 or 30 watts will not get through. This can be the difference
> > between
> >> > a solid QSO and no QSO. There is a reason why most CW operators
> > run 100
> >> > watts or more. Nevertheless, some ops are operating under the
> >> > misconception that PSK is "digital" and therefore the power level
> >> does
> >> > not matter. This is no more true of PSK than any other mode, such
> > as CW.
> >> >
> >> > The real problem on PSK is that many operators do not know how to
> >> use
> >> > their narrow filters and IF width and shift controls to filter out
> >> > strong adjacent signals. They plop their VFO on 14070 or so, and
> >> tune
> >> > their rigs with the software (essentially by "tuning" the soundcard
> >> > frequency) with their IF wide open. Every strong signal on the band
> >> > then pumps their AGC and they wonder why all the traces but one or
> >> two
> >> > are faint and unreadable. Sure you can operate this way, so long
> > as you
> >> > don't mind not being able to read many signals that a little
> >> filtering
> >> > would render quite readable. I am often surprised by the number of
> >> > operators who have no understanding as to how to filter out QRM on
> > PSK.
> >> > Instead, some take the position that no one should have a strong
> > signal
> >> > at all. (One wonders, do those who argue this also believe that
> > no one
> >> > should run a high-gain antenna? Is everyone on PSK supposed to
> > run only
> >> > verticals or dipoles?). This argument is, I submit, absurd on its
> >> > face. Here at the bottom of the sunspot cycle signals are often
> > darned
> >> > weak, and some power will make otherwise infeasible qsos possible.
> > Most
> >> > rigs, if properly tuned, will permit a clean PSK signal at 100
> >> watts.
> >> >
> >> > I happen to have several neighbor hams who are frequently S9 + 20
> > on my
> >> > s-meter. I nevertheless have no difficulty working on the same
> > band as
> >> > they do, because I use my filters and IF controls accordingly.
> >> >
> >> > de Roger W6VZV
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at
> >> > http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at
> > http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at
> http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.3/824 - Release Date: 5/29/2007
1:01 PM
>
>
