VK Power Limits

[VK4ABW]

That is correct Alan. You cannot change the station in any way. If you do, then you go thru the process again.

regards
Gary
VK4ABW/VK8AW

[VK3DXE]

That is correct Alan. You cannot change the station in any way. If you do, then you go thru the process again.

regards
Gary
VK4ABW/VK8AW

And so there goes the possibility of experimenting with station parameters.... The sooner we a done with these archaic rules ,the better. It really smacks of 1950's Brtish beauracracy to me. You can almost see something like this in an episode of Yes Minister.

[VK4WDM]

I totally agree that big does not have to be broad and dirty. Gary VK4ABW and I used to be only 12km apart, and if he was beaming my way on 6m I could hang some raw chooks on my antenna and he would cook them for me, but his signal was (and I guess still is) so clean that he caused me no grief at all.

Unfortunately you can tune around the bands and find many sigs that are loud AND broad, and guys using 400w when 40w would do. Yes, education is the key but some folks won't be educated.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

[VK4ABW]

Staying on topic as best as possible guys, so here are a few observations of mine.
1. A IC7700 was purchased because of the guaranteed specifications. (200watts out plus a very hot receiver on many bands).
2. A QRO permit was obtained for specific reasons (EME & TEP).

For TEP - i listen to the indicators on 43 - 49mhz and depending on the conditions decide how much power is needed. If the indicators are weak and fluttery i usually run between 1.0 - 1.5k. If the indicators are mid way S5 - S7, then i run between .5 - 1k and if the indicators are S9 or over, then .5k is ample. This is between 300 - 340degrees.

For EME it depends on the distant station antenna. A station using 5 elements at the other end requires the full 1.5k at my end. If they have stacked 7 - 9el's then 1k does the trick and stations with a stack of 4 yagis, only .5k is needed for success.

(TEP) - I have on occasions heard stations that i simply cannot get back to with 200w . Is this an imbalance in total rx/tx or an imbalance in propagation or both? The imbalance in rx/tx at my end is quantifiable because my receiver performs better than the 200w out. The imbalance in conditions can be quantified (after experimenting with power levels) but due to the constant propagation variables, you need to keep your overs short and watch for sudden changes.

There are logical reasons for imposing power limits and everyone should be aware of these. EMR and interference (clean signal) are big on the agenda these days. We have all heard the stories of how people have been exposed to high power and the consequences. But, due to technology changes we now have an opportunity for change in Australia. With the closing of channel O, i am firmly behind the idea of all states being allowed 400w on 50mhz. You have to do an EMR assessment regardless of what power level / frequency you use anyway.... If you want more, then you have to demonstrate that you meet the EMR safety requirements however, the requirement to state a reason for higher power is irrelevant as we are amateurs, therefore we experiment

City life is a rf soup bowl and controlling it would be a nightmare. Can you imagine if everyone ran 1k on all bands Maybe the powers to be could apply the same principles as when Channel O was around eg: 400w on 50mhz if you live in town & 1k if you live out of town or on a large property

That's my 5c worth (inflation factored in )

de Gary
VK4ABW/VK8AW

[VK3AUD]

i would love to see legal power limits raised to a kilowatt and bring us in line with other major countries. If NZ is considered remote, i'd say a lot of Australia is remote too, also one doesn't continually have to use a kilowatt of power all the time for those worried about power bills and the environment etc.. just use it when needed, like the speed limit you don't have to travel at the max limit all the time. If a kilowatt is worth only an extra S point, that could mean the difference between that rare QSO or not.

[VK3ZFS]

Im looking at a less is best angle with power..my future country QTH will have 20 acres land and very large trees lots of big antennas, one minor issue, I have no grid mains power, power will be solar panels, wind turbine and batteries.
I find a 20-30 dB lower noise floor than my metro QTH at the bush block, I get better reports running 30-50 watts than running 100+ watts at the metro QTH

[VK3PY]

A lot of the commentary here is very parochial, seen through the eyes of particular operators' interests, neatly demonstrated by VK4WDM who equates "digital modes" with PSK31 on HF. Little or no mention is made of other bands, weak-signal VHF/UHF propagation or other digital modes. HF operators happy with 120W or less? Great - stick with it, but don't make assumptions about other people's needs based on your limited interests.

As a keen VHF/UHF operator, I'd like to be able to use 400W regardless of mode. As I see it, 400W CW or FSK441 etc. is no more likely to cause interference to any service than 400W PEP SSB would. So why are we stuck with 120W on CW? Nobody would advocate using 400W FM just for the sake of it, and I doubt many would, even if they could. Why would you? But operators chasing weak-signal propagation using CW or digital modes would welcome the ability to use 400W legally (c'mon, we know power limits are often observed in the breach anyway. Wasn't this the excuse used to justify raising the Novice licence power limit from 10W to 100W all those years ago? The world didn't cave in then).

It is worth remembering that we radio amateurs are bound by regulations concerning interference, as well as EMR exposure limits. If our stations are not the source of interference, and they comply with exposure limits, what's the big deal?

Chas
VK3PY

[VK4TS]

Boy is my 100 watts to a dipole unreal - I just worked a guy in the USA and he was running stacked 5 element yagis.. and gave me the same report I gave him ....


HELLO HELLO did anyone listen when they attended Radio classes ??

The DX station has probably got you WHEN you are in the clear - from the other DX stations , from the millions of other locals that he is hearing......................

\

[VK4YEH]

Whilst I do not personally need to (or have the antennas to) go above 100W, I can appreciate that some of us do need to, to achieve contacts that would otherwise be unobtainable - and in fact extend our knowledge of propagation, new modes etc.

As a "basic" user I have to say, as has been said before on this thread, that the problem is not the power that is used but the splatter caused by terrible implementation of that power.

Tim

[VK2FAK]

Hi all.....

As has been mentioned on this thread.....how many are actually running a very efficient antenna system..

Dipoles at the right height and length for the band being used and the correct matching and short cables......Yagi's at the right height ....and on an on......increasing power should be the last thought of a Ham operator..

You don't increase power just to compensate for a bad setup, fix the setup first.

John

[VK4TS]

John,

I would hope we are talking about people who have the best practical setup - and there are limits due to property size etc that cant be overcome other than by an increase in power -

[VK3DXE]

Hi all.....

As has been mentioned on this thread.....how many are actually running a very efficient antenna system..

Dipoles at the right height and length for the band being used and the correct matching and short cables......Yagi's at the right height ....and on an on......increasing power should be the last thought of a Ham operator..

You don't increase power just to compensate for a bad setup, fix the setup first.

John

John, I'm really not sure what you're getting at here? Come up and have a look at some of the serious operators on VHF+ and you will see that that is exactly what we do.

I currently run an LFA yagi on 2m at about 10m agl, soon to be two of them (around 15.5dBd gain). You probably can't get a much better, more efficient antenna for the applications I use it for in the available real estate. I'd love to be able to run 4, or more of them, but real estate constraints simply won't allow it.

This gives me a "massive" (almost) 3.8KW ERP on 2m on CW and digital modes. Marginal at best for EME work and nowhere near enough for serious long haul terrestrial work (NOT when summer troppo can get your crappy old FT290r into a home made quad seem like a great setup).

Simply being allowed to run 400w on JT65 or CW would bring that up to a more realistic 12.5KW ERP, almost enough for "reliable" EME work. Another 4dB increase to 1KW (as I have covered earlier in this thread) opens up a whole new layer of stations I'd be able to work off the moon. It is NOT about S points here John, its about time on the positive side of the readability curve.

I can tell you from experience that all of the serious VHF+ ops spend considerable time, money and effort on ensuring that our antenna systems, preamps, etc. are the best we're able to achieve in the available real estate and within the constraints of the available resources. To then be knobbled by some archaic rule that allows us to only run 1/3 of the power on the most efficient modes is beyond my comprehension. As I stated earlier in this thread, it is some stupid rule that dates back to 1950's Britain and is almost worthy of an episode of Yes Minister.

[VK3BJM]

Alan,

Hear, hear!

This my piece of wet string...

I moved out of Melbourne to get enough land to build this (note the only thing visible there that I didn't build with my own hands is the Nally tower); I made sure I was well enough outside the nearest town that neighbour issues would be a thing of the past.

Good feedlines (LDF5-50), good pre-amps, proven design Yagi, power dividers, all ticked off the check-list.

Having the option of using more power to push to the extremes with long-haul terrestrial and EME is the only thing unavailable!

how many are actually running a very efficient antenna system..

I believe the term is "Been there, done that!"

I also suggest that, had I had a kilowatt available on my last DXpedition to Mount Arden, SA, I'd have returned home with SSB AEP contacts into Melbourne over the 900 km path, instead of the bitter joy of hearing stations from there, and not quite being able to make myself heard.

73,
Barry
VK3BJM

[VK2AAH]

For what it is worth I still don't agree to a blanket increase in maximum power. However what I do agree is needed is more education, and a more developed process to permit QRO permits to be issued. You can summarise the various views here into those who believe that amateurs have a right to higher output levels, while I think the majority believe that some have a NEED for higher power. And that is the basis, I think, for a better system of QRO permits- demonstrated need combined with demonstrated competence with documented safeguards to both health, the local environment, and other users.

I run legal power at HF- I think that is all I need for what I want to do. But there are those engaged in serious research- and they deserve to have access to QRO permits. Better education in how these can be obtained may help encourage others to participate in this research.

Cheers,

Richard
VK2AAH

[VK2CSW]

<snip>
I moved out of Melbourne to get enough land to build this (note the only thing visible there that I didn't build with my own hands is the Nally tower); I made sure I was well enough outside the nearest town that neighbour issues would be a thing of the past.
<snip>

So I read from this that you believe that AR should be limited to those who:
A) Have the finances to purchase a rural property to house their antenna farm
B) Have the opportunity to work outside of a city
C) Do not have other responsibilities and priorities

The facts of life for many are that they are limited in their finances, need to live where the work is and have lots of things that need doing.

So having to live where council and real estate matters limit your antenna system is a fact of life. Strapping a boot warmer onto one of these systems is a recipe for RFI.

This is why it would be far better for the WIA to use their limited time and resources to fight for more favourable council regulation rather than more power. Making it easier to erect efficient antenna systems would benefit more amateurs than increasing power limits. To quote Mr Spock - "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

So do we want to keep AR as a pursuit that is fading away as all of the 'baby boomer' retirees die out, or do we want to make it possible for the hobby to continue?

If the WIA were serious I know which way they should jump.

Colin

[VK5DWC]

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)

Although you have no argument from me over an increase in power levels, with the exception of 'F' calls, no increase of maximum legal power will overcome the problem of ever increasing local QRM. The basic rule of 'if you can't hear them, you can't work them' remains, regardless of power. You have to bear in mind that an increase from 400w to 1000w is less than half an 'S' unit increase in signal strength.

[VK4OX]

It looks like there are two schools.
The weak signal vhf/uhf dx-ers who want more power and the rest. Being one of the former, I would lke to run more power. Let's not muck around, 1500 watts output seems reasonable.

For those not familiar with weak vhf qso's, please download and listen to an mp3 file of one of my daily cw qso's with vk2bcc. It's on vk2bcc's website:

http://www.suburbia.com.au/~colinc/


Colin, vk2bcc, and I watch aeroplane movements on flightradar24:

http://www.flightradar24.com/

and Colin starts calling every 15 seconds when the plane is approaching the hotspot for reflections. I listen, and when I detect a signal, I send three questionmarks (???) to let him know. When signals get a bit stronger I send ?? and then just one ? when almost good enough for qso. We are 800km apart.

We use abbreviated numbers in the report:
"e" stands for digit "5"
"a" stands for digit "1"
"n" stands for digit "9"

So "ean" stands for 519.

I am using a 500Hz xtal filter in my receiver IF.

The point of all this is that vk2bcc's signal is only about ONE dB above the noise level AT BEST. I measure this with an RMS voltmeter across the 600 Ohm rx audio line (agc off). ONE dB is VERY significant when signals are on the noise floor, so to dismiss 4dB, (10log[1000/400] = 3.98dB), as being "less than half an "S" point (?) and therefore (apparently) not worth it, demonstrates a lack of understanding of weak signal dx.

For the weak signal dx-er, there will always be signals that are on the threshold no matter what power levels are involved. After moving out of the city to a good vhf qth, installing the best antenna array, best low loss Heliax and best mast head rx preamplifier one can, being able to run 1500 watts pushes the "radius of influence" out just that much further.

If this sort of operation is of no interest to you, fair enough, but don't stand in the way of those who want to push the boundaries.

More power Igor!!

73, Adrian. Vk4OX

[VK3DXE]

Well said Adrian.

I started a whole explanation of just this earlier today, but work got in the way

When QSB is present, each extra dB means that the signal which is on the threshold of intelligibility spends that much longer on the positive side of the curve.

[VK2AAH]

Adrian,

Who is standing in your way? I'm sorry that is a bit rude... there is the option for you & others like you to pursue high power permits without any general increase to all amateurs. If you believe you have a need for higher power then pursue this option but please don't suggest for a minute that those of us who are concerned about unnecessary high(er) power being run by those who don't need it has anything to do with your issues.

Cheers,


Richard
VK2AAH

[VK4BG]

Hi Guys,

Adrian, I could not agree more with your posting...but some seem to " fear" a higher power level being available. Just because it might become available, does not mean that everyone will use it...simple cost will prevent some, others who have posted here seem to think that it is not required...for THEIR pursuit of AR...and others could careless. Richard, VK2AAH's comments leave me a bit perplexed...but he appears to look at AR from a " professional" point of view, given his background that is posted on QRZ.com. We are not professionals...it is " Amateur Radio " ...some of us are quite happy with an Icom IC-7000 and an Ameritron AL811H Amp ( why do you need the Amp Richard ???? ) and average antennas. Others are pushing the envelope with weak signal VHF Operation. It is very easy these days to see if your planned setups are EMR compliant, and yes, it would be great if we were allowed greater than a 10m mast in the 'burbs, but the chances of having that changed in the near to distant future...don't hold your breath...I have just spent 7 YEARS trying to get planning permission to build something totally unrelated to AR, that is basically a 15m by 15m Shed with my local Council. We are all in this hobby for what we want to get out of it...and to pit one group against another for whatever reason, is not a good look. Pro power increase groups....yep, works for me...others seem to think it unnecessary...others can't seem to divorce themselves from their work culture, where we are seem as " Amateurs "...well, we are ! We are here to experiment and learn. I have a background in Land Mobile, Aviation and Data Telemetry....which has absolutely nothing to do with my AR activities. I'd like to see an increase to 1500W...the Americans seem able to handle that power level without too much trouble, and we should be able to as well. I have had just as much fun running 10W HF as I have had on 400W VHF...but I know I could achieve more, given a power increase and careful planning. In this hobby, you cannot really look at your 100W with a Dipole HF Operation and make a blanket statement that you don't think we need a power increase....what you really need to say, is that if the power level was increased, you would probably not use it...others may.

73
Glenn
VK4BG