Re: XHDATA-808 & the AR-1780


Troy Riedel
 

Gord,

> Things like the AR-1780 are not included because they are a few cubic sentimeters too large, but five or ten pounds of ferrite rods, and multi hundred strand wire,
> that far exceed the size and weight of the radio are OK. 

Bingo, you hit the nail on the head [for me]!

I understand the need to have a "line" (criteria), but there is no "line" for what is attached in the form of enhancement - antenna - & that always seemed contradictory to me (a radio like the D-808 that is .76 cubic inches above the "line" - which confirms a contradiction as some EXclude while others INclude).

I subscribe to this list because I enjoy reading everyone's logs and reports of what they capture - I find it interesting.  Some inspire me to strive for the same - the posts of people using the same or similar radio.  The fact I'm not using a wheeled cart or milk crates to transport or move my [ultralight radio] antenna does not detract from the interest I have of reading that someone captured a medium wave signal across the ocean.  That's a "wow".  But the latter is not me - and that's perfectly fine - to each, his or her own.

But I'd never post my logs and I would never go for an award or a record because of my confusion (contradictions).  But that's fine, too.  I get inspired from this list.  And I have a spreadsheet with my own personal "hall of fame" within my bald head ;-)  My set-up is probably the equivalent of a Smart Car - I just can't compare what I do to someone using a racecar or a tractor trailer especially through a blurry lens when some include while others exclude the same "car".

I really appreciate the open discussion.  Cheers to all ... and keep DX'ing, use whatever you want, and get others involved (I'm trying to inspire my 30-something son to get into the hobby)!


Join main@UltralightDX.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.