> But you are correct, as you move away from coastal areas it becomes much
> more of a North/South issue.
> Stations in the middle of the country but located in the Southern tier of
> states enjoy
> vastly improved propagation. That's why a simple "distance factor" would
> have a minor
> impact on DX contest results. The true situation is much more complex than
> a linear
> correction can address.
It is woefully apparent the actual path in relation to magnetic poles makes
as much or more difference than the path length does.
Also I'm 100% sure distance is not a linear problem. A distance correction
could never be level, unless it was different for every band and every
distance. Even that would not solve the latitude and signal crossing the
magnetic poles issue, which is much more obvious than distance.
For example, I can work VK6 long path (real long path, not skewed short
path) from my mobile on 40 meters because the path misses the poles. I have
a tougher time working UA0 with my stacked beams than I do VK6 from my
mobile, even though the distance to UA0 is much less.
I just don't believe a change to distance based scoring would do anything
for most people. It certainly would help people in the southern latitudes of
North America, but it could actually hurt stations who already have it far
rougher than the SE USA.
CQ-Contest mailing list