On Fri, 28 Feb 1997 19:15:32 EST, kt3a@juno.com wrote:
>Hey fellow Cheapskapes!!
>
>Who is calling us cheap? Would they plunk down
>$120 or more for a rig that only works CW and only
>about 50 kHz and you HAVE TO BUILD IT TOO!
>
>I don't call that cheap.
>
>I would be willing to pay the same price for a rig
>as a commercially built one.
>I don't call that cheap. To build takes skill.
>We may be able to get a rig on the air for $20 and
>some junk box parts, but I call that smart.
>QRP builders are some of the best shoppers at a
>hamfest, not because they are cheap, but because
>they know what to look for. Anybody can apply
>for a plastic card and plop it down at the dealer's
>table. No skill and no smarts.
I think you addressed the hb issue quite nicely. I'm only now
getting back into ham radio after a four year absense on the HF
bands, and since I'm unemployed, I admit that "cheap" (on the order
of the 38 special) has something to do with it. However, the
"cheap" I've seen typically has more thought and care involved that
some of the microprocessor-controlled commercial stuff.
We, as amateurs, tend to read things like "specs" and "data sheets"
that others perhaps don't, being too "professional" to read the
instructions. :) The little thread on the bypass cap on pin 7 of
the LM386 discussion bears this out.
I've finally picked up a copy of QST for March (it hit the local
newsstand today), and read the so-called "offensive" letter. I
would choose to say "unenlightened" or "unelegant".
Adam, who I believe is now monitoring our list, raises some good
questions. He unfortunately attributes them to QRP, but rather the
emphasis on "digging" the signal is applicable to all of amateur
radio, QRP or QRO. If I run 1000 watts into a dummy load of an
antenna, I can't expect too much. People will be digging me out,
regardless of the power output.
I learned early that antenna construction is the much more
inexpensive amplifier. Plus, it works on recieve as well (unlike
the power amplifier).
But more to Adam's point, which seemed to me to be a "why would
anybody want to do this QRP thing?" type question, and a good
question at that.
Why do I want to do QRP?
by me
I liken QRP operating to sailing. Why would someone sail when 500
hp motors are widely available?
Sailing requires that equipment be at peak efficiency to be
effective. The sail (antenna) is what drives the boat (power). The
steering mechanism and rudder (radio) must be efficient and
sensitive, to take advantage of every puff of wind (propogation
change).
Power boats (QRO stations) rarely notice the subleties of the wind
(propogation). They plow along right with it. To sailboats (QRP
stations), those subleties are life and death. A good captain
(operator) will learn, over time to read the wind (propogation), and
use it most effectively.
Sure, there is an advantage to running power boats over sail boats.
But there is more skill developed in a sailboat.
To lose the extended analogy for a moment, the QRP operator, because
of the knowledge of the subtlies of propogation, antenna
construction and efficiency, and clean signal generation, has a
distinct advantage in working DX, even when the QRP operator works
at QRO power levels. He/she knows the terrain better.
72 es 73 de
Marty, KM7W
____________________________________________________________________
Jackson, Tennessee e-mail: mdwatt@usit.net
http://www.public.usit.net/mdwatt
"The Curmudgeon's Corner"
NorCal - QRP ARCI #7514 - QRP-L #953 - AK/QRP #098 - Grid Sq EM55oq
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]