From: NAME: Andy Burns
FUNC: Research and Development
TEL: 0324 493981 <BURNS,AL@A1@GRRD04>
To: "cq-contest@tgv.com"@rcwi01@mrgate@grrd04
Scores first:
Relayed from Robert GM3YTS
ZC4Z Multi Single
Q Z C
160m 160 9 48
80m 306 16 68
40m 2276 31 100
20m 997 34 118
15m 1265 35 107
10m 759 35 95
5756 160 536 Total 11.49 M
Ops GM3YTS G3SXW KC7V N7BG K5VT
Now the debate on LPL's signal v's N2RM. Ref Eric's last note and the burnt out
switch. I listened closely to the two stations between 1300z and 1700z on the
Saturday of the cqww cw test and found both signals to be identical in strength
and quality all thru that period (checking every 15mins or so) on 15m.
Unfortunately I didn't monitor the stations during the opening and closing of
the bands. If there was a problem at Eric's end then it wasn't showing over
here. On average, N2RM was sending slightly faster.
Both stations were loud (of course). QSB during the middle of the opening was
taking the signals down by only 4dB or so, wereas most of the other loud signals
from the US were being affected by 8dB or more.
On the basis of this cursory look, I can't see any reason why N2RM should have
been doing any better in this direction.
What might be interesting is to do a more detailed study in the ARRL SSB test
next March but this time covering the early and late periods. I will be hard at
it in the test so won't be able to listen but may be able to persuade a few
people this end to do the monitoring. Audio quality along with strength could
be monitored - any other ideas? The stations I could involve probably would
only have wire antennas but then as over 50% (or maybe 75%) of your callers
would be in the same boat then it would be quite representative.
Let me know Eric if your interested.
Andy
GM0ECO
burns_al@grrd04.dnet.bp.com
|