CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Run rate vs. S&P rate RTTY Roundup

To: john@kk9a.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Run rate vs. S&P rate RTTY Roundup
From: Barry Jacobson <bdj@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 20:05:55 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi John, it is possible but I used same setup a week later in NAQP CW and
got more business than I could handle. Also, got good unsolicited signal
report from N2IC in New Mexico. I check my signal strength on RBN and
usually get 20 and 30 dB and occasionally 40 and 50 from various locations.
Will try to monitor signal strength more carefully with some remote web
SDRs.

Thanks for responding.

Barry WA2VIU

--
Barry Jacobson
WA2VIU
bdj@alum.mit.edu
@bdj_phd

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 7:17 PM <john@kk9a.com> wrote:

> An 80m dipole is a poor antenna on 20m and 40m so you were probably just
> not
> loud enough when CQing to be noticed and keep the frequency clear.
>
> John KK9A
>
>
>
> Barry Jacobson WA2VIU wrote:
>
> Hi, sorry for late post, but originally posted elsewhere and was told
> appropriate for this list which I just joined. Glad to meet you guys.
>
> Due to family obligations during RTTY Roundup only had two hour stint on
> 40m Saturday night and then about 45 minutes on 20m at close of contest. In
> both cases, my run rate was worse than S&P. Could call CQ for quite a whole
> and just get a bite here and there. Was running 500W into an 80m dipole. I
> assume part of it is  my state NY is not very in-demand. But conventional
> wisdom is that far fewer people run than operate, so there should be plenty
> of customers.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Barry WA2VIU
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>