QRP vs QRO

[wb6bcn]

Quite often people will place a post in here as to if qrp is any good. There are pros and cons to each.
I hope this answers some questions.

QRP vs QRO:
My rig is QRP + 6 dB (20 watts) at full output, and quite often I run QRP
(between 1 and 5 watts).
I find there are at least eight things that determine if you will if you will or won't make contacts.

1: Antenna.
2: Receiver selectivity & sensitivity.
3: Operator patience.
4: Room noise. (Non received QRM)
5: Band conditions.
6: Local conditions.
7: On SSB; the quality of the speech processor.
8: A good ground system.

Let's look at what I have listed:
1: On the higher bands the path loss as an absolute is higher for a given distance, so the use of a beam antenna is going to outperform a simple dipole on DX.
With a mobile in motion 10 meters is the highest band you can expect to have at least unity gain from an antenna. With a 160 meters mobile a very small percentage of the transmitter power goes into the air.
Just as a handi talkie with a duckie vs a handi talkie with a quarter wave antenna. The duckie at 2 meters can be as much as 10 dB down from a quarter wave antenna.

2: Selectivity and sensitivity aren't determined by the number of conversion stages any more. IE: a double or triple conversion isn't necessarily any more selective or sensitive than a single conversion receiver. In the earlier receivers that was fact. You needed double or triple conversion receivers to insure good image rejection along with good selectivity. Today with crystal filter networks and putting the IF frequency at 50 + MHz, with as little as 2.3 KHz pass band, the selectivity is set at the higher frequency. Since the IF is so high, the probability of an image is all but gone. Additional converters add the chance of receiver birdies, and the more spectrum you cover and the more conversion stages the greater the chances of birdies.

3: Call, listen, tune. Unless your receive is crystal controlled, look +/- at least 10 KHz of your transmit frequency for CW contacts and +/- 1.5 KHz on SSB. Not all transceivers had locked VFOs, therefore it is possible someone may be off a bit. On 40 meters, and places where voice operation is in different parts of the band, you may for instance be transmitting on 7155 and receiving on 7050, or transmitting on 7295 and receiving on 7050. This is because the allocations between Regions 1,2 and 3 are not in the same part of the band in all regions. If you want to work all countries on certain bands then you may be forced to do this type of operation. It of course easier if you have the legal limit and a multi element beam. However; It is possible to make good DX contacts running QRP if you are very patient, or are lucky enough to be ahead of the pack of powerhouse stations.

4: Loud music, kids, mechanical noise, ETC. All these things make it difficult for you to hear the person on the other end as well as the other person hearing you. Sometimes the use headphones will make a difficult QSO possible.

5: Band conditions: This is a situation that even QRO may not help. Your only choices are wait until they improve, or change to a band with better conditions, if possible.

6: Local conditions: QRN; Electrical storms, meteoric
static, Aurora flutter or any other natural noise.
QRM; Man made noise. Living in Suburbia, you may not be able to escape certain forms of these noises. These problems aren't going to be helped with QRO on your end. However the choice of antenna may help greatly.

7: The quality of the speech processor can make a big difference in how well you are heard.

8: A good ground can at times reduce the amount of local noise heard by your receiver. The better you hear a weak station, the better your chances of making a DX contact you may otherwise miss.


Something to think about:

There are three basic types of operating situations:

Alligator: Your receiver for one reason or another is lacking sensitivity, and you're running full power. Everyone hears you and you hear few if any stations.

Balanced: If your transmit power is adjusted so you are being heard good and there is no noticeable splatter. This is said to be balanced. Balanced is when you run just enough power to maintain good communications, but nor cause undue interference to others.

Elephant: This situation exists when your are hearing everyone, or nearly everyone in a group, and most aren't hearing you. This situation may not be a fault of your setup. It may be due to the QRM and or QRN is lacking in your area, but severe elesewhere.
Sometimes, if you have more power it may be prudent to turn it up. In some cases, where the other station has very severe QRM or QRN this may not help.

[w8ob]

I mentioned in a earlier post that anything I can do with 100 watts I can do just as well with 5 or less. The biggest factor in sucessfull qrp operation is spend a little time and money on the most important part of any station the antenna. I operate CW here so the mode is a bit of a factor as well. I am usually on 80 or 40 meters in the morning and carry on ragchews on cw via QRP mode no problem. Prop condx play a big part as well, here in the northern lats the bands have been down the crapper since mid January but even with 100 watts or more its difficult to carry on QSO. The few times I have ran QRP on SSB the receiving stations just can't believe that I am running only a few watts. For fun I usually drop power down to around 100 milliwatts or less. Last time I did this I carried on a ragchew with a LZ ham for about 40 minutes on 10 Meters. Try it you will like it.

[k3sam]

I also enjoy QRP, just for the fact that I know my station is working well without increasing my electric bill. There are times when, during a QSO, a station will join in that cannot hear me. At that point I will increase the radio output until I can be heard, or in bad conditions turn on the amp. I like to think that the FCC's rule, use only the power needed to make a contact should be followed. Further, it shouldn't be a rule, it should be common sense.

I have about 3/4 of the states confirmed using 500mW however have slacked off as of late. When I get motivated, I'll go for the other 1/4. It's fun and challenging.

-Sam

[K3XR]

i think we kicked this dead horse a few times before....for the post that thinks he can work any station with 5 watts he can work with 100 watts, that may be true for his end....what about the guy trying to copy your 5 watts with tons of qrn and qrm, how about giving him a break....as to fcc requirements with respect to power....97.313(a) "an amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications."......if the desired communications is to carry on a qso with a station, who can not copy you, because of your low power, why is this not a violation???
dan,k3xr

[w8ob]

Well XR when i work the stations via QRP I never tell the station I am running QRP since I am the one calling cq its up to the answering station to decide if he wants to work me or not. Since I am getting 579 to 599 reports I don't see where this is a issue. On the other side of the coin if a QRP station answers me and he is down in the noise fine thats what my receiver has all the fancy dsp controls on it for to dig em out. Some of you guys got a real boner for QRP if you don't want to work em don't its that simple. Sunday I worked a couple of euro stations with 250mw on 15 meters, quite a difference from the crowd on 75 and 20 SSB that gotta run legal limit to work each other a few blocks away.

[w2agn]

Well, K3XR's post does certainly prove a point. Prolonged exposure to high levels of RF DOES cause brain damage!

[KA8NCR]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w2agn @ Mar. 04 2003,08:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, K3XR's post does certainly prove a point. Prolonged exposure to high levels of RF DOES cause brain damage![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I think the point he's trying to make is that QRP operation isn't necessarily enjoyed on both ends of the contact. While certainly a great number of net operators, DX stations and casual types will yield to a QRP station as well as do everything in their power, trying to copy the guy running 2 watts is like repeatedly raising a drawbridge for a rowboat. The first few times it's cute, but after that it can be annoying and frustrating.

However, I think what k3xr is missing is that many QRP ops tend to work each other, so some of his argument is moot. But for those QRP ops that get upset because people tend to dismiss their contacts due to poor copy need to understand that their enthusiasm may not be shared on the other end. And for those QRO ops that get all bent outta shape over the peanut-whitles, let me recommend that you get over it. Turn down your RF gain on the receiver and they'll go away.

[K2ORC]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif8--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K3XR @ Mar. 02 2003,20http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif8)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i think we kicked this dead horse a few times before....for the post that thinks he can work any station with 5 watts he can work with 100 watts, that may be true for his end....what about the guy trying to copy your 5 watts with tons of qrn and qrm, how about giving him a break..
dan,k3xr[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I sometimes operate QRP on 75 m using a mode that a lot of other QRP operators do not -- AM, with my homebrew 5 watt xmtr. The little rig can be a lot of fun to operate and its gotten me some surprising contacts.

K3XR has a point when he mentions considering the guy on the other end. But Dan, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. QRP requires finesse and consideration. Those at the other end do sometimes have to go through a lot trying to haul a QRP signal out of the noise and not everyone enjoys that kind of operating.

The original poster made good points about maximizing the signal of a low power xmtr with a good antenna and a solid ground system. IMO, the point about the ground system belongs right there with the antenna for improving any station's xmt and rcv capabilities.

If I hear an in progress QSO and want to join in using the QRP rig, I listen before asking to join. I want to discover whether the stations I'm hearing are located within the favorable areas of my 75 m dipole pattern. This kind of information comes from studying an antenna's performance under a variety of condx and at different power levels. Another good reason to keep a logbook. If I think one of the stations won't hear me that well, I don't ask in.

Working QRP has to take into account band condx with an eye not only on QRN, but QRM. If you know you will be at best S9 and you hear that the noise level is S9. You get my point. Often I just call CQ, adding &quot;operating QRP&quot; after my callsign. That puts the ball in the other guy's court. This approach on some quiet nights has gotten responses from stations 500-600 miles out with good signal reports.

You can do a lot with a little, but it requires some efforts. These efforts though can lead to big improvements at every power level in a station.

Paul, K2ORC

[wb6bcn]

Paul, K2ORC covered some excelent points.
One thing that is often overlooked, or at least missunderstood, is the relation between the watt and the S unit. From S8 to S9 is double the receive signal voltage, or 6 dB. As on my radio QRP + 6 dB (20 watts), If someone receives me S8 with 5 watts, 4 times the power, or 20 watts will only increase the receive on the other end to S9. By the same token, from 375 watts to 1500 watts is also only 1 S unit, or about 2 S units between 1500 watts and 100 watts.
Granted, there are times when I am unable to get anyone on any band, then there are times I have been heard as far away as Perth Australia with S9+. What I also have to aid in transmission and reception is an antenna that exhibits gain over a dipole on all bands from 40 meters to 10 meters.

As for the real QRP enthusiast, and there are people there, is what is called the 1 mile band. This is under FCC part 15 and there are many hams that work this section. It is 160 to 190 KHz, with a maximum of a 50' antenna and 1 watt DC input. 700+ miles has been worked on this band. Most of it is CW, but there are those that work AM and other modes.
If you haven't given QRP a fair shake, just look at the reports you get from people, then imagen what the level would be if they were to drop thier power by a given factor. I am sure most people have heard a station running 1500 watts, and receive them at S9 or less, or heard another running 100 watts or less with 20 over S9. Maybe the 100 watt station was more distant; this happens. It doesn't mean either was not truthful, it simply shows that sometimes it takes less power when band conditions are favorable.

[WA7KKP]

I think it is a matter of habit. Those who have the kilowatt amps use them whether the need is there or not.

Many times I have heard hams across town using their amps, especially on 20 meters. And when 10 meters is open you certainly don't need a KW to go around the world.

Its like driving the speed limit on the highways. A Ferrari or Lamborghini is nice to have, but a Ford Escort goes just as fast, and a lot farther on today's expensive gasoline.

Gary Hildebrand WA7KKP

[wb6bcn]

I think too many people read spec sheets on unrelated items and think it applies to every case.

Example: 100 mw AM broadcast transmitter advertises up to ¼ mile range. A 10 watt unit same band says up to 2 miles. That is 100 times the power for 8 times the distance. Using that logic to talk to someone 8 times more distant you need 100 times more power, which means 1,000 watts for 16 miles.

Granted this is misguided logic, but there are those that think that way, unfortunately. On the other side there are those, as you say, think &quot;if I have it and, I am going to use it. &quot;

Why MUST it be THIS -vs- THAT?

QRP is one facet of ham radio. It is not a -vs- anything, unless we desire to make it adversarial.

QRP (and yes, I have done it, it is fun, but like all other modes it has its limitations and benefits) requires a different set of skills to master it and fully exploit its benefits. Most of them are intangible and revolve around the ability of the operator to squeeze the most out of what they have to achieve some goal.

QRO simply is QRP writ large. In other words.. you can run QRO and have a different set of goals and purposes in mind in keeping with WHY you do it.

So, personally.. let's stop the THIS -vs- THAT discussion. It's not one that anyone can win and only serves to polarize folks and generate a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

QRP is fun, QRO is fun. QRP/O (what DO you call the power range between 20 watts and 100/200W? It's NOT QRP or QRPP and it's NOT QRO? I thought that QRP/O or QRPO might be a good Q signal. :-)

Enjoy whatever facet you choose.. explore, exploit, enjoy, experiment, experience!

73 Chuck K3FT

[AG3Y]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">what DO you call the power range between 20 watts and 100/200W? It's NOT QRP or QRPP and it's NOT QRO? [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Sorry to butt in here, but I always thought that QRP and QRO were meant to be used in this manner, &quot; Shall I QRP ? &quot; &quot;I am going to QRP &quot; meaning &quot;Shall I reduce power ?&quot; &quot;I am going to reduce power&quot; And similarly for QRO as applied to increasing power.

When did the terms &quot;QRP&quot; and &quot;QRO&quot; inherit some reference to a certain power level? By the old definitions, you could &quot;QRP&quot; by turning off your Kilowatt amplifier and just running the exciter (maybe around 100 watts ) , or you could &quot;QRO&quot; by turning that amplifier on, or even by switching from an HW-8 to an Icom 720A (such as I do ! )

It wasn't a certain power level, or range of power levels, but rather the act of significantly reducing or increasing the power output that determined &quot;qrp&quot; or &quot;qro&quot;


Each power level has its own drawbacks and advantages. Let's not splinter into even smaller groups and cliques over this power issue! When I work QRP, I usually try to work the strongest signal on the band, knowing that he will probably hear me just fine. This is, unless I specifically hear a station that I know is running at &quot;qrp&quot; levels (either from his previous comments, or if he is on the qrp calling frequencies or signs /qrp with his call.

BTW, you are much more likely to work a station at &quot;qrpp&quot; levels if you work them on CW or one of the new soundcard digital modes. I have heard and worked many stations running 5 watts to indoor dipoles and other types of &quot;Apartment&quot; antennas. Not only can they be heard, but often their signals are totally indistinguishable from the others on the band, no matter what the power and type of antenna is being used by the other stations!

Something to think about!

73 from Jim AG3Y

[K6UEY]

I remember when the &quot;QRP&quot; mode made it's appearance, it became popular with the expanded use of the transistor. Of course in those days most Hams built their gear they didn't wait for some far Eastern company to market it. QRP was then a challenge as it was power levels of 1 watt maximum input to the final amplifier. It required the ability to build and test antennas to get the most effeciency, and it required a knowledge of Propagation to be able to slant all the odds in the operators favor, not to mention the ability to design and build a transmitter that worked at maximum effeciency.
It was fun and a challenge to operate, it was not for the faint of heart it took a lot of patientce and dedication. Then came along another more modern breed of Ham that felt one watt input was too Hard, and it was not fair, the only reward was the pride and satisfaction of ones own accomplishment, and those were values that were old fashion and no longer recognized by the new Modern Computer savy Ham. So the power level was raised so that all could make QRP contacts with out all the work involved, this was being fair, giving equal oppurtunity to those who were not into earning the priviledge. The self satisfaction and pride of accomplishment gave way to the common place, so this then began to breed comtempt for those who use #adequate power for the guy on the other end to copy, this began the QRP-vs-QRO controversy. Because the challenge was not there any more they had to stir the pot to keep their interest going, and of course we today see the result of that.
ENJOY!!That that is left........... #73, # ORV

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[W1RFI]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MattBeers @ April 14 2003,00:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One thing I've found interesting in these threads, and in the commentary I hear at QRP club meetings. #QRP ops send a LOT of CQ calls! #That #makes it a lot easier. #If you're using 250mW and calling CQ, of course, the guy calling you is most likely running more power - and you'll hear him well. #Just for grins, one day I heard a ham about 20 miles from me calling CQ. #I knew the guy as an ardent QRP enthusiast. #I grabbed my 30dB attenuator, stuck it inline, and also dropped the power to the rig's minimum of about 5 watts. #And I answered him. #Now, he was S9 (before I added the attenuator), and I assumed he was using 5 watts. #So, my 5 watts, through 30dB of attenuation, should still put me at S4, and this was 40 meters daytime, with about S1 band noise. #I called him - no reply. #He CQ'd again, I replied - no reply. #I ran the power up to 50W and called again - no reply. #I was now transmitting with 50mW, and above the attenuator's 10 watt rating. #I finally pulled out the attenuator, and called again, but with the rig back to 5W. #This time, he came back to me, giving me a 539 signal report. #I called him on the phone. #He had heard me every single time! #But he said that when he's CQing, he never answers a weak reply. #He figures everybody else is running power, so if my reply is weak, he knows that I only heard him on a propagation peak, and that QSB would kill the QSO. #Then, to explain the 539 report, he said I was actually about 10 over S9, but he always gave a report that assumed QSB could make it worse, and he wanted me to feel OK if QSB took me out and he could not copy me. #In other words, he did not want to have to struggle with having to dig a signal out of the noise, but he expected others to dig his signal out. #It also turned out that he was running 250mW. #He had not known in advance that it was me, because I used a club callsign that had been issued the day prior.

I call CQ sometimes. #But only if I have already tuned the band and heard nothing, or nothing to break into. #And when I do call CQ, I call CQ DX - and yes, I use some power. #Usually the exciter barefoot.

Nothing wrong with QRP, of course. #Just make sure that you properly credit the OTHER guy for your QSOs. #The make/break point on that QSO wasn't your antenna or your receiver - it was the OTHER guy's ability to dig you out of the noise.

mb[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Quite the tale, Matt. It doesn't jive with any of my experiences with QRPers, but quite the tale. And that &quot;first day&quot; club call is quite the coincidence that adds to the mystique.

Most QRPers don't call CQ enough. They are of the mistaken belief that they won't be heard well enough to get answers. This is especially frustrating in contests, when I hear the Q stations working other stations, but have no way of working them. (At 10 milliwatts in the CW Sweepstakes I really *can't* call CQ effectively. At 5 watts, I can hold frequencies on the less-crowded bands.) Some QRPers do only call the stronger stations, again in the mistaken belief that the weaker ones probably won't hear them. But I cannot imagine a QRPer who is calling CQ not answering anyone who responds or giving a 539 to a station that is over S9. I wonder if you could share with us who that guy was so we can give him a bit of what for on the QRP lists. :-) I am also curious; what was the club call?


73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI

[n0xas]

Matt, sounds like your friend is kind of a nutbar.

I call CQ a lot because I know that way the people who call me CAN hear me, and don't object to &quot;digging my signal out of the noise&quot;. I don't assume every ham I hear can hear me as well. When I do answer CQs, I usually get 559 or better reports... not exactly a lot of work to dig it out, apparently. I get some extremely weak responses and will answer them all and like most hams give accurate signal reports whenever possible.

QRP isn't magic... but it is fun, at least for me. The only calls I ignore are fists I just can't copy.

72,
Dale - N0XAS

[AG3Y]

Hey, BTW, how come two separate threads got started on this subject #at nearly the same time? #Or did they? #I'm confused! # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

Maybe we should all put our defense of QRP operation on this string, and our defense of QRO operation on the other one. #That way, we can talk out of both sides of our mouths if we want to, and no one needs to be the wiser ! # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Just follow the thread you are most interested in! # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

73 from Jim AG3Y and see you on the digital modes!

[WB2WIK]

C'mon, guys, this is an easy one.

QRO to prevent being QRP'd on.

[W8FAX]

Last year I attended the QRP get together in Dayton. I was there for the FISTS thing, but it was a combination. I found the QRP gang to be some of the most energetic and enthusiastic groups of hams around. They were all up beat and more than willing to talk &quot;radio&quot;. They did not stand around complaining about vendors, flea market costs, ticket costs, the ARRL, or any of the usual. It was great. Plus, I had the good fortune to be able to view the top natch rigs entered in the home brew contest. Craftsmanship was outstanding. These were not &quot;kits&quot; but real home brew stuff, built with same care as any rig from any era. I am NOT a QRPer and am also sometimes frustrated at trying to work the pip squeek signal that answers my CQ. But I try to copy, and if I can, great......another QSO. If not??? Well....maybe next time.......Al/W8FAX

[W5KRM]

Pretty much common known information. Nothing new here.