Azimuth path means nothing if you’re using a dipole. A beam and tower is
for the rich (or for foreigners, same thing).
How would going by the numbers help you in your situation anyway? It’s
different than going by geographical areas. Going by numbers is about as
good as being a list lizard and having a DX “net.” At that point you might
as well include a DXCC certificate in a cereal box. No challenge.
Frustrates callers to no end. Takes 2x as long. INEFFICIENT. Yes, it is.
This is different than calling by geographical area (eg west coast, east
coast, Europe, Asia).
Just don’t do it! Unless your operating skills are so poor that you can’t
control a reasonable sized pileup, then, MAYBE go by the numbers.
A good op knows how to thin down the pile quickly and keep the pileup under
control.
Ria
N2RJ
On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 1:38 AM Hans Brakob <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not even close, Ria.
>
>
>
> EU is a chip shot from 9Y, and W4 isn’t even in the azimuth path. JA is
> directly in the lengthy path to W from KG6, and has over a million HF hams
> vs. a few tens of thousand HF hams in W4.
>
>
>
> But 9Y was tough from KG6 – they were always working F and SM.
>
>
>
> dit dit
>
>
>
> Care to try again? 😊
>
>
>
> 73, de KG6AQI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *rjairam@gmail.com
> *Sent: *Sunday, July 4, 2021 02:42
> *To: *Hans Brakob <kzerohb@gmail.com>
> *Cc: *xaxaxaxa yayayaya <cqtestk4xs@aol.com>; cq-contest@contesting.com
> *Subject: *Re: [CQ-Contest] Running by the numbers
>
>
>
> I have not. I have operated from 9Y beaming Europe though. The W,
>
> particularly W4 wall is real. And I did manage to work one Guam
>
> station in that pile too by the way.
>
>
>
> There are better ways than by the numbers.
>
>
>
> Care to assume something else? :)
>
>
>
> 73
>
> Ria, N2RJ
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|