All posts by Thomas Witherspoon

Woo hoo! Finally taking my QRP Labs QMX on a POTA activation!

Those of you who purchased a fully-assembled and tested version of the QRP Labs QMX are, no doubt, patient people.

While you can order a kit version of the QMX and receive it fairly quickly (still, I believe), the assembled versions take more time as the QRP Labs crew is small and they build and test these by hand.

I ordered mine on June 5, 2023, and it shipped on December 27, 2023.

Truth is, I’ve had a QMX kit since Hans Summers announced it at Four Days In May (FDIM) prior to the 2023 Hamvention. I’ve been meaning to build it but, as many of you know, my life has been a tad crazy these past months and I never got around to it.

I purchased an assembled version of the QMX because I will be reviewing this one and wanted a factory-tested unit. I would have never guessed I’d receive the assembled unit before building it!

Familiar Form-Factor

The QMX looks so much like my QCX-Minis, I’ve gotten them mixed up in the shack! The menu system is very similar to the QCX, but there are some changes to accommodate band changes, modes, etc., as the QCX-Minin series is mono-band CW only.

The QMX, on the other hand, is a five-band, five-watt, multi-mode (CW, Digital, and likely SSB in the future) transceiver. It’s hard to believe you can purchase the QMX for as little as $90 (bare-bones) kit or $165 (fully-assembled and tested).

I initially thought I had an issue with my QMX because it kept shutting down the transmit function. Turns out, that was all user-error. I mentioned the issue on an episode of the Ham Radio Workbench podcast, and a couple of listeners wrote to tell me what I was doing wrong: I was feeding it too much voltage. The QMX doesn’t want more than 12V or so. If the radio detects even a temporary mismatch, it shuts down the TX to protect the finals, etc.

I was unintentionally triggering the QMX’s self-protection functionality!

Once I figured that out, I decided to simply pair my QMX with my Bioenno 3Ah 9V LiFePO4 battery. That would yield about 3 watts of output power and be a comfortable voltage for the QMX.

Vance Historic Birthplace (US-6856)

On Thursday, March 7, 2024, I finally took the QMX outdoors where it belongs! I had a one-hour window of time to complete a full activation. I decided to pair the QMX with my Chelegance MC-750 vertical.

My QMX is a “low-band” version that covers 80, 60, 40, 30, and 20 meters. I thought the top end of its band coverage would serve me best mid-day, so I planned my activation around 20 meters.

Setup was easy and simple. You can see the full set-up process in my activation video below.

Gear:

Note: All Amazon, CW Morse, ABR, Chelegance, eBay, and Radioddity links are affiliate links that support QRPer.com at no cost to you.

On The Air

I hopped on the air and started calling CQ POTA after sorting out my QMX settings–I needed to adjust the sidetone and I had to take it out of split mode! Continue reading Woo hoo! Finally taking my QRP Labs QMX on a POTA activation!

Free e-Book version of The ARRL Antenna Book

UPDATE: I reached out to the ARRL and they replied that even though this link is publicly available, it is actually intended only for those who purchase print copies of the Antenna Book.

Per their request, I have removed the links in this post. -Thomas

Many thanks to Alex (KR1ST), on Mastodon, who notes that the e-Book version of The ARRL Antenna  Book 25th Edition is free on the ARRL website.

Simply go to this link, click on the format and add it to your cart. At checkout, the price will be free. Once processed by the ARRL, you’ll receive a download link.

I’m not sure if this is only open to ARRL members (I am one), or if you only need an account at ARRL.org.

The Antenna Book is a MASSIVE volume an amazing reference for any amateur radio operator. I highly recommend grabbing this e-Book version even if, like me, you have a print version! I’ve no clue how long this offer will last.

Replies from the Ergonomics vs. Performance poll

Yesterday, I posed the following question and asked for your input:

“Which aspect of a QRP radio holds more importance for you: its ergonomics (ease of use, comfort, display, size, etc.) or its performance (receiver test data, dynamic range, etc.)?” 

Thank you to everyone who participated in my recent quickie poll, which has now closed. There were so many interesting points in the feedback. Here are the results from the 252 votes cast within a 20-hour window:

In essence, a slight majority preferred ergonomics, with 57.1% of respondents indicating it as more important, while 42.9% favored performance.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I’m well aware that this question paints with broad brush strokes. There’s not a give-and-take between the two: an investment in the user interface typically doesn’t mean performance is going to suffer. Indeed, I would say most of our modern transceivers sport decent ergonomics and decent performance.

If anything, the relationship between price and performance plays a proper tug of war. Even that’s nuanced, though!

I also received a number of comments and messages from readers who pointed out that my survey was flawed because it didn’t define what I meant by ergonomics and performance carefully enough. I agree that this wasn’t a carefully considered and properly worded poll.

That said, the way I wanted to present this was more like an informal raise of hands–something I often ask for during radio club presentations.

Selection of Comments

The comments from readers were excellent and what I would expect to hear from people who’d raised their hands in a club meeting.

Here are snippets from a few of them, (for all of the comments, click here):

From Scott (KK4Z):

A tricky question. I actually prefer a balance between ergonomics and performance. If you have a good performing radio with mediocre ergonomics, it might not be used to its full potential. A radio with good ergonomics and mediocre performance might be used to its full potential which may be above a good radio with poor ergonomics.

From Mark (NA4O):

My assumption is that performance would have to be good enough for the radio to be in the running. Likewise, ergonomics would have to be good enough for it to be considered usable.

From Nick (KC0MYW):

As I consider the radios that I have and have used and which ones I like better and why, I think that the performance of the radio can almost be considered an ergonomic characteristic with regard to how comfortable and easy the radio is to operate. While a radio with poor ergonomics is not a lot of fun to operate, a lower noise floor and smoother QSK can add as much to the enjoyment level as an easy to access RIT control.

From William (KR8L):

Difficult to say… Since my field operations are very casual affairs I suppose performance is a secondary consideration, although I don’t think I’d enjoy doing a POTA activation with my HW-8.

Ergonomics can be very important — for example, although my FT-817 performs well enough, the number of button pushes and knob twists required to change the keyer speed (or just about any other setting) can be very annoying.

The well thought out controls of my KX2 make it my favorite for field operating, but then it’s a good performer too.

From Brian (K3ES):

Tough question. I will say ergonomics, but what I really mean is easy access to the features I need. I don’t necessarily need contest grade performance, but I do rely on features like a tuner, cw speed adjustment, vfo, etc.

From Emily Clark:

I pick performance for a few reasons: I do contest QRP at times (most recently ARRL RTTY Roundup). I like the filtering, the clarity of the screen, the true FSK for RTTY, and the ability to put an IF spectrum out into N1MM+. I only have wire antennas, and with the AH-705 I virtually do entire contests on my 80m OCFD.

From Michael (N7CCD):

If taken to the extreme on both options, I think I would have to choose performance. I would rather operate a radio that can handle QRM (overloaded front end, etc.) with confusing menus, than the opposite. If not taken to the extreme, then I may choose ergonomics…

From Mark (W8EWH):

Ergonomics for me because I, like many, have many field portable radios and as I cycle between them I need to be able to use them without the need to consult a user manual or waste time fumbling around a menu system looking for a particular feature or setting.

From Shawn (WS0SWV):

Performance! As a retired design engineer, I learned that good design addresses the performance needs of the user(s) in an intuitive manner. If it is cumbersome or overly complex then users will tend to migrate away from it. Some communities have specific ergonomic requirements and for QRP field radios I would argue the primary ones are size, weight, current consumption there are others depending on mode of operation like keyer memories and narrow filters for CW but those are the big ones.

From Wlod (US7IGN):

Different people have different preferences and ideas about ergonomics and performance. It’s important to find a balance, or better yet, have different radios for different tasks.

From Andrew:

Ergonomics is nice, but without performance … it has no use, imagine a coffee mug; it may be hyperergonomical, but then it has a hole at the bottom…

From Dick (K7ULM):

Interesting question. It is interesting how the ergonomics of the KH1 over shadows the performance of the KX2 for some use cases. In some uses the KH1 is definitely the the choice due to its ergonomics. For other radios of its size it will be chosen because of performance and ergonomics. The specific use case is the controling factor IMHO. Performance slightly over ergonomics, generally for me, kind of?

My thoughts?

If there was one comment that reflected my thoughts most closely, it would be this one from John (AE5X):

There’s a lot of overlap between these two characteristics. Too little of one undoes the effectiveness of the other.

I find that most radios do have “good enough” performance (barring an outright flaw or deviation from legal requirements), therefore I pay attention to ergonomics more than to lab numbers of dynamic range and other electronic specs…if I need lab equipment to discern whether or not my radio’s performance is acceptable, it’s acceptable. I don’t like buried menus for commonly-used features.

John’s right. We’re lucky these days in that most of our modern QRP field radios have acceptable performance for our field activities like POTA, SOTA, IOTA, QRP Contests, and some even have the chops for the RF density of, say, Field Day.

If performance is acceptable, I tend to give more weight to ergonomics because it’s important to me that the radio be fun to use.

What makes this show of hands a hot mess, when we look at it under the microscope, is the fact that both ergonomics and performance are nuanced. Herein lies the challenge I find in writing radio reviews: I believe it’s important to explore those nuances so that the review can inform a potential buyer (who might not share my same point of view) in a meaningful way. Sometimes it’s difficult to do that within a print publication’s word count.

Closing thoughts…

As we often say, there is no “perfect” radio that will please everyone, so I think it’s important before we make a purchase decision that we’re realistic with ourselves and understand what we actually value.

Here’s one real-life example–outside the world of QRP transceivers–I’ll share from a friend who, sadly, is now Silent Key. Since I can’t ask for his permission, I won’t mention his name.

Back in 2010, he came to me for advice on buying an SDR (Software Defined Radio)–a PC-connected black box receiver.

Even though not that long ago, keep in mind this was still during the infancy of modern, high-performance, SDRs and most of the options were going to set you back $1,000 or much more. In other words, a substantial investment.

This friend was an avid SWL DXer and was considering an SDR that, at the time, had a slight performance edge over popular SDR models from manufacturers like Microtelecom, RF Space, and WinRadio. I’m not going to call out this SDR by name either, but I’m sure some of you can guess which one I’m referencing.

This particular SDR had fabulous receiver characteristics on paper, but it was well known that the proprietary PC application that controlled it was a bit of a nightmare to use.

My friend purchased it. I tried to help him set this SDR up and learn how to use some of the basic functions and features, but we both found it a struggle. The GUI (graphic user interface), one could tell, was likely designed by the hardware engineer, not someone with experience creating usable software applications, also, unlikely someone who was a DXer or SWL.

He ended up selling this SDR after having owned it for less than a month. He agreed that the performance was brilliant, but hated using the app that controlled it. In the end, he purchased the venerable Microtelecom Perseus and absolutely loved it.

Rob’s advice

This topic of our personal preferences is such a deep one; I think I might put together a club presentation, exploring some of the nuances.

Speaking of presentations, if you’ve never seen Rob Sherwood’s excellent presentation exploring transceiver performance, I highly recommend you check this one out. Rob will be the first to tell you that modern transceivers tend to perform so well that the operator should give weight to ergonomics and usability.

Also, consider listening to this episode of the Ham Radio Workbench podcast when Rob was the guest.

Cast Your Vote: Ergonomics vs. Performance – What Matters Most in a QRP Field Radio?

I’m in the midst of writing several radio reviews, and this process always brings up a few inherent dichotomies.

For example—and the point of this quickie poll—some operators seek, first and foremost, a radio with brilliant performance specs. This is especially the case when we’re talking about contest-grade, pricey transceivers. Dynamic range, sensitivity, filtering, and blocking? Yeah, those are looked at very carefully by contesters and DXers.

On the other hand, for some, a radio’s performance is less important than how enjoyable the radio is to actually operate. Are the ergonomics well thought through so that common tasks are easy to perform? Is the display easy to read? Is the encoder weighted correctly? Is the radio compact but useable, etc.?

Even though field radios are typically not thought of as “contest-grade,” many of them have superb contest chops and receivers that can handle RF-dense environments with ease (I’m thinking about my KX3 with roofing filter here).

However, some radios might lack precision filtering and a contest-grade receiver architecture but are designed with field use in mind interface-wise. The Elecraft KX1 and Penntek TR-45L come to mind, although there are many more. Both have great receivers, actually, but the designers obviously placed an emphasis on user a user interface that is field-friendly. I find both such a pleasure to use.

What’s your opinion?

I recognize fully that I’m painting with broad brush strokes here—there are so many other variables in evaluating a radio. I’m sure most of us want a good balance of both performance and ergonomics.

But if pressed for an answer, where do you fall? What do you give higher priority: performance or ergonomics?

If you’d like to cast your vote, please consider participating in the poll below:

A Slimmed-Down Solution: My first POTA activation with the Penntek TR-45L “Skinny”

You might recall a recent POTA activation where Jonathan (KM4CFT) joined me at the Vance Birthplace K-6856 US-6856–?

Jonathan used my Penntek TR-45L for his portion of the activation, and I was pleased he got to spend some time with this magnificent CW machine. You might also recall that it still had a buzz in the speaker audio–something inside the radio was vibrating.

KM4CFT working the TR-45L in late December 2023.

I tried to track down the buzz as Jonathan operated by tightening some of the screws holding on the speaker grill (yeah, I’m sure that was annoying, and he’ll think again before activating with me in the same space–!). I knew, though, it was something inside the chassis that was vibrating with audio.

As I also mentioned, my TR-45L was a prototype unit (I helped Beta test it)–it had a couple of mods and wasn’t exactly representative of the upgraded production model.

John (WA3RNC) at Penntek reached out to me after I published my recent field report and video; he offered to upgrade my TR-45L to the production chassis which would sort out the buzz. I was most grateful, of course!

He then asked if I would be interested in checking out the TR-45L “Skinny,” which is essentially a TR-45L in a much skinnier chassis. The Skinny model lacks the ATU and battery options but is lighter weight and more portable. I mentioned to John that I’d like to purchase one, actually. Since John was interested in sponsoring QRPer, we ended up working out a barter (at full market price) for ad space. I love this arrangement, actually, because I was going to approach him about sponsorship at some point anyway.

The Skinny!

Now keep in mind that the TR-45L is one of my favorite CW radios. I love the audio, the receiver characteristics, and the “Apollo era” aesthetic. I think it’s one of the best-looking and best-sounding radios on the market.

The Skinny is just like the bigger TR-45L, just roughly half the depth. I did have concerns that the audio wouldn’t be as good since the acoustic chamber would be smaller, but turns out, I had nothing to fear. The Skinny’s audio is on par with its bulkier sibling.

There was no learning curve with the Skinny because 1.) it’s identical in operation to my TR-45L and 2.) Penntek radios have super simple interfaces, and almost every function has a top-level direct control.

Zebulon Vance Birthplace (US-6856)

On Tuesday, February 27, 2024–the day after receiving the TR-45L Skinny–I packed it up and took it to the Vance Birthplace for its inaugural POTA activation!

That day, I had about 90 minutes to enjoy an activation, and I was looking forward to spending time with the new Skinny.

Vance was a great choice that day because the weather was moody; it was gusty, rainy, and I knew their picnic shelter would provide excellent cover.

The Skinny (in its padded bag), the MC-750 and my ABR cable assembly.

The TR-45L Skinny, unlike my original TR-45L, has no internal Z-Match ATU, nor does it have an internal battery. In fact, there’s no room for either in the Skinny, so it’s not even an option.

I paired the Skinny with my Chelegance MC-750, which is a resonant antenna when deployed correctly, so there was no need for a matching device. I supplied power via one of my 3Ah Bioenno LiFePO4 batteries.

Setup was simple and easy!

Gear:

Note: All Amazon, CW Morse, ABR, Chelegance, eBay, and Radioddity links are affiliate links that support QRPer.com at no cost to you.

On The Air

I hopped on the air with the intention of working 20 and 17 meters. Continue reading A Slimmed-Down Solution: My first POTA activation with the Penntek TR-45L “Skinny”

K3ES Field Report: Hiking with Molly and discovering a new two-fer activation site!

Many thanks to Brian (K3ES) who shares the following field report:


Molly is on the trail of a POTA activation.  Temperatures are in the 40s, but there is still snow on the ground.

A Hike and a 2-fer

by Brian (K3ES)

When you live in northwestern Pennsylvania, and a February day shows up with the sun shining, moderate temperatures, and nothing pressing on the calendar, it is time to go and enjoy the outdoors.

One of the best ways to do that is to take a hike with your dog.  Hopefully  your dog is like Molly, who doesn’t mind taking a break mid-hike for a Parks on the Air (POTA) activation.  So on Wednesday, February 21 we scheduled an activation and jumped in the truck for a drive to the trail head.  The hike to and from the activation site would be a nice change from the short walks we had been taking to the pond behind our house in the colder weather, and from activating while sitting in the truck.  And, to better share the joy with our POTA hunters, we would make this activation a 2-fer, giving them credit for both the North Country Trail National Scenic Trail (K-4239) and Pennsylvania State Game Land 024 (K-8725).

Molly is ready to go.  She is not at all amused by waiting for me to take pictures.

Since I had hiked the planned route before, both solo, with friends, and with Molly, I expected that the route would be familiar.  Some of it was, and some of it was brand new to us.  You see, the North Country Trail volunteers had been busy since we last hiked as far up the trail as we planned to go.  They had cleared and marked an entirely new route for one section  of the trail, bypassing an old favorite activation site!  So, we got to do some exploring, and we found a new favorite activation site.  Bonus!

Finding a New 2-fer Site

One of the things that I enjoy about POTA is planning my activation.

Since days long ago as a Boy Scout, I have enjoyed outdoor navigation.  Map and compass always fascinated me.  Things have gotten much easier with Global Positioning System (GPS), online maps, and online satellite imagery.  Still, I do most of my activation planning while sitting comfortably at home with a tablet or a computer.  For this trip, finding the newly marked trail (that had not yet been transferred to the online map) presented a bit of a challenge.  While I could follow the marked trail easily, I needed to be sure that I had entered Game Land property so that the 2-fer activation would be valid.

Thankfully, I had access to an app on my smart phone to help me solve this problem as we walked along the trail through the woods.  The On X Hunt app combines GPS, topographic maps, satellite imagery, and tax office databases to identify land ownership (even when the owner happens to be the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania).  Full functionality of this app is not free, but as the owner of a parcel of land, it is something I had elected to pay for.  Once it became clear that the newly marked trail would not quickly rejoin the prior route, I set up the app to record our track on the map.  After confirming that Molly and I had definitely crossed PA Game Land property line (there were no marking signs along the new trail), we went just a bit further, then found a promising spot to set up for the activation.

With a change to the K-4239 North Country Scenic Trail route, we found a new 2-fer site within K-8725, along the partially snow-covered Game Land road that carries this section of the Trail.

Setting Up to Activate

I chose to locate our station in the woods beside a Game Land road that provided the path for the North Country Trail in that particular area.  We set up on the inside of a bend flanked by trees with long overhanging branches.  I placed my chair in the woods on the inside of the bend, and tossed a throw line over a branch on the outside of the bend, then deployed my Packtenna EFRW with 71 ft wire as an inverted V across the road.  I used the throw line to hoist the middle of the radiating wire up about 30 ft, and secured both the feedpoint and the far end of the antenna to nearby trees, about 6 ft off the ground.

Even though I did not expect traffic on this road (shaded areas were still snow covered, and the snow showed tracks only from woodland creatures), I try to deploy my wire antennas high enough that they are not a hazard to others who may travel through.

Temperatures were rising, but with the high only expected to hit 50F, I brought a blanket to give Molly some additional insulation (though she is a rough, tough POTA dog, as a Boston Terrier, her coat is not particularly thick).  I laid out the blanket beside my operating position,  so that it could provide both top cover and insulation from the ground.

Molly is settled in for the activation.

I connected my RG316 coaxial cable to the antenna feedpoint, set up my camp chair next to Molly, set up the radio, and prepared my log book. In very short order, I was on the air, spotted by the Reverse Beacon Network, and logging contacts. Continue reading K3ES Field Report: Hiking with Molly and discovering a new two-fer activation site!

The Index Labs QRP Plus: Any fans out there?

I recently acquired an Index Labs QRP Plus transceiver (more on that in a future post!).

This little rig was produced in the mid to late nineties and, to my knowledge, was one of the first 160-10 meter, field-portable, general coverage QRP transceivers on the market. The only other one I can think of was the Ten-Tec Argonaut II, but please correct me if I’m wrong on this point.

QST ad from 1995 courtesy of WD8RIF.

I’m just curious if anyone here ever owned one and what they thought of it? Please comment!

Field Radio Kit Gallery: W4JL’s Venus SW-3B and “Sporty Forty” Vertical

Many thanks to Dave (W4JL) who shares the following article about his portable field radio kit which will be featured on our Field Kit Gallery page. If you would like to share your field kit with the QRPer community, read this post Continue reading Field Radio Kit Gallery: W4JL’s Venus SW-3B and “Sporty Forty” Vertical

Testing the Tufteln AX1 Support: Late-Shift POTA with Vlado in Pisgah National Forest

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024, one of my daughters had a dress rehearsal for A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The venue where the cast meets is a good 45 minutes from my QTH, and if I didn’t have POTA fever, I’d have to find something to do to burn four hours of time.

Since I do have POTA fever, I see these windows of waiting around as an opportunity!

An opportunity to spread the POTA fever, even.

On that particular Tuesday night, my dear friend Vlado (N3CZ) didn’t have any plans, so I invited him to join me on a short, late-shift activation. The idea was that he’d perform an activation, then we’d go grab dinner at a restaurant in Mills River.

Pisgah National Forest (K-4510) and Game Land (K-6937)

Quick note about park numbers: As of the time of publishing this article, we’re still using the “K” prefix for US parks. Tomorrow (March 20, 2024), all US park prefixes will change to “US.” Pisgah National Forest, for example, will be US-4510 starting tomorrow. Today, it’s still (barely!) K-4510, so that’s what we’ll use.

We drove to the Sycamore Flats Picnic Area where I performed a number of late-shift activations in February. What I love about the site is that it’s rarely busy (especially at dusk and into the evening), there are numerous spots to set up, and it’s pretty convenient to the Shakespeare venue.

Tufteln AX1 Antenna Stand

I’d mentioned to Vlado in advance that I was going to test “a new antenna support system.” I think he might have assumed I was packing a large tripod with a 1/4 vertical or something similar, so it was fun to pull out the AX1 and  Tufteln AX1 Antenna Stand!

Vlado, like me, loves compact radio gear, and I knew he’d never used the Elecraft AX1 before, so I was looking forward to showing him just how capable of an antenna it is for POTA, even on 40 meters.

That day, it had been pretty gusty, and in the evening hours, while a little calmer, it was still a tad windy. I thought it would be the perfect opportunity to pair the AX1 with Joshua’s AX1 stand because it’s much more stable than the AX1 bipod in windy conditions.

Source: Tufteln.com

The stand consists of two parts: a base and an antenna sleeve. The sleeve screws into the base, and the AX1 simply slides into the sleeve. The height is perfect for the KX2’s BNC (indeed, it works with a number of radios). The stand will also accommodate the AXE 40M coil.

Source: Tufteln.com

When attached to the KX2, it makes for a very stable base. You can even use it as a stand-alone antenna support for the AX1.

Joshua has had this stand in his Tufteln product line for over a year, but I don’t think I’ve actually used it during an activation that I’ve also filmed.

New Mics!

Speaking of filming, this activation with Vlado gave me an opportunity to test my new DJI wireless mics. The system comes with two mics so both Vlado and I used them.

I filmed the activation, but in truth, was doing this more or less to test the mic audio. I believe I mentioned early on that this video might not ever be published.

In the end, I decided to publish it–the audio was quite good, and the wireless mics cut down on the wind noise dramatically.

Gear:

Note: All Amazon, CW Morse, ABR, Chelegance, eBay, and Radioddity links are affiliate links that support QRPer.com at no cost to you.

N3CZ: On The Air

My goal was to get Vlado on the air and give him a taste of POTA using the AX1 and 40M coil. I hadn’t planned to activate–since we were grabbing dinner afterward–but I did end up activating after the UTC day changed.

Without realizing it, I actually put a lot of pressure on Vlado.

He started his activation at 18:42 local (23:42 UTC). That meant, in order to log a valid POTA activation on February 13, he needed to log at least ten contacts in 18 minutes (using the AX1!).

Keep in mind that Vlado is a contester and DXer (also, very much a QRPer!). He’s used to operating CW at insane speeds when needed. In fact, he’s always one of the top people (if not the top) in the CW speed test at the W4DXCC contesting and DX conference.

I suggested he operate around 20 words per minute.

He started calling CQ POTA, and the first few contacts came in pretty slowly. I was getting nervous that I might have unintentionally made Vlado’s first POTA activation one that wouldn’t be valid.

Then the pace started picking up. (Whew!)

He ended up logging a total of 10 contacts in 12 minutes! Woo hoo!

Here’s his QSO Map, showing what the AX1 pushing 5 watts for twelve minutes can do:

Next, we decided that I would, indeed, perform a quick activation.

I spotted myself on the POTA site and started to call CQ, then it hit me: it was 23:58 UTC. If I worked one contact in that two minutes, it would be considered an activation on February 13 of only one contact.

Instead, we waited for a little over a minute for the UTC day to change!

I ended up working a total of 24 contacts in 21 minutes. Woo hoo!

Here’s my QSO Map:

And here are our logs:

Activation Video

Here’s my real-time, real-life video of the entire activation.  As with all of my videos, I don’t edit out any parts of the on-air activation time. In addition, I have monetization turned off on YouTube, although that doesn’t stop them from inserting ads before and after my videos.

Note that Patreon supporters can watch and even download this video 100% ad-free through Vimeo on my Patreon page:

Click here to view on YouTube.

What fun!

I always enjoy hitting the field with Vlado.

Since this quick little activation, he’s been out there hitting POTA sites regularly.

He hasn’t seen the doctor yet, but I’m positive he caught POTA fever. It’s incredibly contagious.

Also, the Tufteln AX1 stand worked perfectly in the wind. I’m going to keep this tucked away in my pack alongside my second AX1 to pair with a wide variety of radios.

Thank you!

Thank you for joining me during this activation!
I hope you enjoyed the field report and my activation video as much as I enjoyed creating them!

Of course, I’d also like to send a special thanks to those of you who have been supporting the site and channel through Patreon, and the Coffee Fund. While not a requirement, as my content will always be free, I really appreciate the support.

As I mentioned before, the Patreon platform connected to Vimeo makes it possible for me to share videos that are not only 100% ad-free but also downloadable for offline viewing. The Vimeo account also serves as a third backup for my video files.
Thanks for spending part of your day with me!
Cheers & 72,
Thomas (K4SWL)

POTA book on sale at R&L today only!

Many thanks to Paul Evans (W4/VP9KF) who notes that the POTA book is on sale at R&L today for $16.95!

Click here to check it out at R&L.

Update: Alex brings up a good point. If you’re not picking this up in store, then the estimated shipping costs will bring the price up to more than the same book costs at Amazon.com (affiliate link). To really take advantage of this deal, you need to be local to R&L.

Click here to learn more about the ARRL POTA Book.