VK Power Limits

[VK3DXE]

I thought I'd better start a new thread on this topic so that Wayne's original thread ( viewtopic.php?f=41&t=10081&p=19723#p19723) doesn't get completely hijacked.

As I stated in that discussion, I feel the power limits in Australia are ridiculously low, most especially for constant carrier modes such as CW, JT65, PSK31, etc.

I'm interested in seeing what other people's thoughts are on this. New Zealand has a 500 watt power limit, independent of mode and most other countries seem to have done away with the, IMHO, outdated idea of applying lower power limits for modes such as those mentioned above. We are stuck with a laughable 120 watt limit in this country for most modes.

While I appreciate the challenge of QRP operation, and have done a lot of it myself, I don't wish this to become a QRP love-in, more a serious discussion about what I see as our outdated power limits, especially when compared to many other parts of the world. There are many situations (particularly at higher frequencies) that require serious power, even after you've improved your whole system to the best of your ability with the available resources. Yes, you can apply for a high power permit, but that is, IMHO, an unnecessarily onerous and complicated process which must be revisited each year.

Anyway, I'd like to hear others' opinions and ponderings on this matter.

[ZL1RS]

As a matter of interest, the following remit was presented at this year's NZART conference and passed with an ammendment to include 160M band. Consequently during discussions between the NZART Liasion Officer and MED there was no objection from MED, and NZART were asked to present the request. I am not aware if this has been done or not, or if there will be a modification to the ZL Amateur Radio GRUL.

73, Bob ZL1RS


Remit 7 HBARC Branch 13 Transmitting

That NZART negotiate with RSM to amend the Radiocommunications Regulations to increase the amateur transmitter power output limit to 1000 watts peak envelope power on the following amateur bands:
80 Metres, 40 Metres, 20 Metres, 17 Metres, 15 Metres, 12 Metres, 10 Metres and 2 Metres.
Other bands would remain at the existing 500 watt limit.

Explanatory Note:
1. ZL is one of the most remote territories on the planet in amateur radio terms. There are many ZL amateurs whose main interest is DXing, contesting, or who are interested in weak signal work such as E.M.E, Moonbounce and meteor scatter techniques and contacts. An increase in power would assist their efforts and help keep ZL amateurs internationally renowned and competitive.
2. Such an increase would bring us into line with progressive administrations in other countries
such as the United States, Canada and many other countries in the EU.
1. An increase in power from 500 to 1000 watts would have little or no impact on the NZ Standard for Radiated Emissions. Modern amplifiers operate cleanly with little or no interference to the rest of the spectrum and would have no impact on digital TV. We would not expect a rise in interference complaints and there has been no evidence of widespread issues in countries where 1000w or more is allowed.

[VK2KRR]

Hi Alan,

My thoughts are that if no one is prepared to tackle the interference issues that are plaguing many operators, the other solution is to be able to use higher power transmissions in an effort to overcome local noise issues. Though I fear in some cases that even 1000W will not help. (not to mention higher power bills)

Also if people are being restricted with antenna heights and size in some areas, being able to boost your power will help.

With the exception of EME & other reflection modes and testing weaker troppo paths, I also am of the opinion that when the conditions are right, you dont need a great deal of power anyway.

Though it would be very nice to know that if you want to give higher power a go, that its quite acceptable to do so.

[VK3MY]

All I will say is, recently a submission was made here in VK to raise the power limit to 1kW, without getting into details and offending several people who read this forum including those from the ACMA, the submission was done incorrectly and needs to be re-submitted for consideration, from discussions I have had from someone who shall remain nameless, is that it will more than likely happen shortly in the near future once the submission is done correctly.

Ross

[VK4WDM]

My thoughts are that if no one is prepared to tackle the interference issues that are plaguing many operators, the other solution is to be able to use higher power transmissions in an effort to overcome local noise issues. Though I fear in some cases that even 1000W will not help. (not to mention higher power bills)

I am not sure how more power is going to help overcome interference, which is a mostly a problem at the receiving end not the transmitting end!

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK2KRR]

Wayne if you had interference issues at your end... if the TX station your trying to receive to could run 1000W rather than 100W... you will have a better chance of hearing them. Thus helping to overcome some QRM issues at the RX end.

[VK2GOM]

...or more meaningful, going QRO from 100W to 1kW = slightly more than just 1 S-point on your meter!

Having come from Europe which is RF soup with too many big wide signals spoiling the fun for everyone else, I would not like to see any increases to VK power limits. In these days of energy conservation too, surely we should run only the power required to do the job, and no more.

73 - Rob VK2GOM / G0MOH

[VK4TS]

Our low noise VK4KW location lets us work QRP North Americans and mobiles on 75M - I doubt there would be many VKs that could claim the opposite - working USA mobile or QRP on 75M... If you cant hear it you cant work it....

[VK3DXE]

...or more meaningful, going QRO from 100W to 1kW = slightly more than just 1 S-point on your meter!

Having come from Europe which is RF soup with too many big wide signals spoiling the fun for everyone else, I would not like to see any increases to VK power limits. In these days of energy conservation too, surely we should run only the power required to do the job, and no more.

73 - Rob VK2GOM / G0MOH

Rob,

When you're dealing with marginal signals, EVERY dB improvement means the signal is on the plus side of the readability curve for that little bit longer, often meaning the difference in completing a contact. 10db, especially on a scatter or EME path makes a HUGE difference. It's not all about S-points.

I'd be happy if we simply came into line with other countries and were permitted 400w on all modes. A roughly 5.5dB increase on those other modes would make a world of difference for me and a lot of other people. 1kw (roughly 9dB) would be even better.

A 4dB increase (400w to 1000w) isn't going to create huge interference problems any more than some womble running his 400w amp to within an inch of its life, but that 4dB opens up a whole new layer of stations you can work on EME and marginal terrestrial paths.

The argument about power consumption is largely moot, especially when you consider the average amateur TX duty cycle.

[VK2FAK]

Hi All....

I agree.....no more power...its just a silly idea to keep increasing power so you can make a contact.....Think of the people around you also trying to enjoy there hobby.......

sorry to say, but some people are just power mad.....so you don't make that contact....is the world coming to an end....don't think so....be patient and you probably will get that contact using what you have now.....

I prefer the idea of making that contact on the least amount of power, seem's to me to be more of an accomplishment..

John

[VK3DXE]

Hi All....

I agree.....no more power...its just a silly idea to keep increasing power so you can make a contact.....Think of the people around you also trying to enjoy there hobby.......

sorry to say, but some people are just power mad.....so you don't make that contact....is the world coming to an end....don't think so....be patient and you probably will get that contact using what you have now.....

I prefer the idea of making that contact on the least amount of power, seem's to me to be more of an accomplishment..

John

John, I agree with you re making a contact with the least amount of power and the challenge of achieving that. However there are paths and propagation modes where low power simply doesn't cut the mustard. For the casual VHF/UHF operator who sees and enjoys the nice strong signals of Summer troppo ducts, that might be enough for them. Unfortunately though, those very same people disappear for the winter, so to speak, and seem to think that the bands are dead. They are not. With more power and a reasonable antenna system, you can regularly work long distances that otherwise might be deemed unworkable.

Just about everybody has a story about working some fantastic distance on just a couple of watts. But for those who wish to pursue regular, reliable communication over marginal paths, higher power limits help. The same applies on HF paths where a path exists, but the casual operator with a small antenna system and low power simply can't utilise it, but bump that power output up by 5 or 10dB and all of a sudden the band is workable.

Just waiting around for "the right conditions" to occur isn't, in my opinion, experimenting.

[VK3BJM]

I agree with Alan.

I also think that comparing power levels "that will work" between HF and VHF+ is problematic. Perhaps the difference in what can be achieved with HF-propagation modes with QRP Vs QRO isn't much - I don't know, I don't partake much down that end of the spectrum. Having more power available up the other end of town certainly can make the difference, as Alan points out during the alleged "down-season" (phooey!!!) and also with the likes of EME.

Personally, I'd like the choice. If I want to try and work 2 m EME with 5 watts, then I can always wind the power back, keeping the mirror handy to monitor how the ol' cyanosis is coming on. If I tired of this, being able to wind up to a level that does work would be good.

Whilst it would be way groovy man to have something matching the folks in the USA, or certain other bits of the world, I think it'd be just rather nice to have CW/Digi modes at the same level as SSB. The 120 w /400 w split does seem laughable, though some might just suggest I laugh too easily...

But if we're going for an overhaul, then something a little better than that is called for. And you always start by asking for a little more than what you'd be satisfied with, so you've got something up your sleeve for negotiation.

And whilst I abhore parochial humour (I do, hand on heart), I will sink low just this once and point out that VK trails NZ, and that's an outrage! We should be shoulder to shoulder, just like we were at the Alamo... (Or was that the Western Front )

Barry
VK3BJM

[VK4TS]

Agreed Barry - Even the new ZL limit of 500w PEP all modes is much more sensible and realistic - I spoke to one of the drivers of the new levels in NZ and his argument was that interference is mainly the Peak Power and so why limit other modes -

Now it looks like they are going to ask for 1KW PEP all modes - Personally I think 1KW PEP all modes is a sensible achievable level - within the reach of the average amateur - and of course you can always turn the wick down..

[VK2CSW]

If those who claim to represent us on one hand, and say that they can't do much as they are mostly volunteers and are terribly busy on the other, are going to go to the trouble of redoing their submission regarding power levels, I would ask that they do not bother.

I would much rather they spend their valuable and scarce time agitating for, and representing us on the matter of antennas, towers and local council "regulation". I believe it would serve the hobby far better if we were to have a federally mandated tower/antenna approval than to spend time haggling over power levels that relatively few would be capable of taking advantage of due to issues with antenna and towers.

You do need to have a good antenna, you do not need a big amplifier.

Just my thoughts
(But I am unlikely to be asked for my opinion by those who seem to make decisions on my behalf)

Colin

[VK2FAK]

Hi all...


What I do know is, that if someone comes on air with 400w on a digital mode near me and totally wipes out the waterfall on my screen...making it impossible for me to enjoy my hobby...I will not be laughing and my generally agreeable attitude will change drastically...

John

[VK1JA]

I would much rather they spend their valuable and scarce time agitating for, and representing us on the matter of antennas, towers and local council "regulation". I believe it would serve the hobby far better if we were to have a federally mandated tower/antenna approval than to spend time haggling over power levels that relatively few would be capable of taking advantage of due to issues with antenna and towers.

I second this thought !!

I'd much prefer to get my antenna up higher and get away from the interference (which in turn would reduce the risk of my station causing TFI) than to simply run more power.

[VK4WDM]

I agree, let's use any available resources to get a sensible regulation on antenna height. What is the point in having a KW if the maximum height is 10m because you immediately run into EMR rule issues.

And why do you need higher power for digital modes? If you can't work what you want to work with 30w on PSK there is something seriously wrong with your set up! One of the reasons why PSK (which is the only mode can really talk about because it is the only one I use) is that you can fit a lot of QSO's into a small slice of spectrum, one of the reasons being the low power used. Think what a waterfall would look like if people were using 400w?

I would however support the idea that there should be changes to the silly rule that permits for increased power for special purposes have to be renewed every year.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK4ABW]

I would however support the idea that there should be changes to the silly rule that permits for increased power for special purposes have to be renewed every year.

Wayne. The good news is the ACMA has changed this rule. QRO permits are issued for 5 years now. I received an amendment to mine, so i don't have to renew for another 4 years

Gary
VK4ABW/VK8AW

[VK3DXE]

Hi all...


What I do know is, that if someone comes on air with 400w on a digital mode near me and totally wipes out the waterfall on my screen...making it impossible for me to enjoy my hobby...I will not be laughing and my generally agreeable attitude will change drastically...

John

John, if they're wipng you out at 400w, they'll likely be wiping you out at 120w, or less.

VK3XPD is S9+50dB here with me on 2m. I can't hear him 10khz away. There are several "Boys of Summer" in the general Melbourne area who wipe out 30kHz either side of them with 50 - 100w at S7 because they're flogging crappy little solid state "linears" to death. I have already started the conversation with people here locally about the need for a nice clean signal. I've found that a very diplomatic conversation about the need for a clean signal goes a long way towards resolving any issues. A 1500w amp running well within its specs at 1KW is generally a whole world cleaner than said crappy little solid state things at <100w.

From my perspective, if my receiver isn't handing a strong but clean signal, then there's something wrong with my receiver setup. I need to do something at my end to help resolve the problem. But if its somebody else's dirty signal, then there are many avenues for resolving it without resorting to macho intimations. If you're an appliance operator who believes the marketing hype about your choice of commercial brand transciever's ability to handle said strong signals without doing some real homework before parting with your cash, then I have little sympathy. And I must say, you seem to be equating big signals with dirty signals.

When I lived in Sydney, I lived less than 2km from Mike, VK2FLR. We both ran high power and rarely caused each other any grief unless we were literally pointing straight down each others' throats. The extra 4 or so dB at a KW wouldn't make a whole lot of difference to either of us as far as "interference" goes, but it would have made a huge difference when it came to completing a contact on a marginal path.

Lets not let this become a debate like the little boys and girls in our respective State and Federal Parliaments who haven't seemed to realise that they're no longer 14 year olds on the school debating team.

[VK3DXE]

I would however support the idea that there should be changes to the silly rule that permits for increased power for special purposes have to be renewed every year.

Wayne. The good news is the ACMA has changed this rule. QRO permits are issued for 5 years now. I received an amendment to mine, so i don't have to renew for another 4 years

Gary
VK4ABW/VK8AW

G'day Gary,

Does it still stipulate that if you change anything in the station setup, you have to apply for an amendment?