Gary et al.
Mine break out thusly:
12 missed #
4 wrong check
6 busted call
All got the section
6 missed prec
FYI.
I can't remember off hand if I used NR #, or if I only sent the number.
That could make a difference -- but the "NR" takes time to send. Seems like
we've had that discussion before.
- Jay/K4OGG
At 10:11 AM 5/8/2000 -0400, Gary Breed wrote:
>Jay et al.
>
>I had a 4.1% "other guy" error rate (25 out of 608 valid QSOs).
>
>10 missed QSO #
>8 missed Check
>4 busted the call (K8AY, K0AY, N9AY, K9AO)
>1 missed Section
>1 missed Prec.
>1 invalid entry (?)
>
>Although I was operating QRP, I did not get a large number of requests
>for repeats and only one guy busted the "Q" precendence.
>
>When I operate QRP I generally send CQ slower than the usual 30+ wpm,
>especially high in the band. I try to match the sender's speed when S&P.
>
>73, Gary
>K9AY
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> The fact is, I had 28 stations (3.2%) that busted some part of the
>exchange
>> I sent. That's out of 903 raw QSOs/887 valid QSOs.
>>
>> Is the 3.2% error rate in the ballpark of what others in SECC experienced?
>> It just seemed to me that 28 stations making errors was a lot.
>>
>> - Jay/K4OGG
>>
>
>
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/seccfaq.html
>Submissions: secc@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/seccfaq.html
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com
|