How much simpler could NAQP be? 100 watts and no multi-multi machines to
contend with.
I broke into the top 10 last year with a single OB16 at 80 feet one one tower
and a C3E on second tower at 60 feet. I did not have a superstation to work
with.
73 Rich NN3W
>
> From: <ku8e@bellsouth.net>
> Date: 2006/01/17 Tue AM 09:19:25 EST
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Categories
>
> K5ZM wrote :
>
> "Do that, and NA loses it's unique appeal. (IMO, YMMV) It becomes 'just
> another contest' with very little to differentiate it from all the other
> domestic tests. "
>
> What's so unique about NAQP ???
>
> The only unique thing I see is that it's just about the only domestic contest
> around where
> you can work everyone on every band. If I want to be serious why should I
> have to compete against
> some guy at a superstation ?? The only reason I even operate is because I
> like CW contesting.
> Sooner or later I will get sick of my mediorce scores , which in my case is
> due to my hardware, and
> I won't bother to operate FT.
>
> I'm sure there are others who share this opinion who don't even bother to get
> on the air for NAQP.
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|