There's been enough said on single-op/assisted - I have (almost) nothing to
add on that subject.
What about packet and multi's ?
First off, let me emphatically state that I have really enjoyed the use of
packet with the M/S, M/2 and M/M efforts I have participated in since packet
took off (approximately 1989 in this area).
However, my past enjoyment hasn't stopped me from thinking about what we
are really "measuring" in multi-op efforts. In the pre-packet days, the
performance of a multi was based entirely on what went on within the 1000 (?)
foot circle encompassing the station. Your score was a combination of your
operator skill and your station design. Finding multipliers meant listening
between the incessant CQ's from the run station, or being engineered well
enough to listen within N kHz of the run station.
Packet has changed the equation. Having a mult station actually scanning the
bands
for mults is almost superfluous. Having a well-connected (geographically)
packet monitoring network, and a LOUD mult station, for breaking those
enormous packet-pileups is the name of the game. The multi score depends
not only on what happens within the 1000 foot circle, but upon the
multitudes who "feed" spots to the multi. Clearly, we are "measuring" something
different than 10 years ago.
If this is what we want, fine. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking
that W0XYZ's fine multi score is entirely a reflection of what went on at the
QTH of W0XYZ.
Steve London, N2IC/0
n2ic@longs.att.com
|