Bill Burgess wrote:
>
> Greetings Mark. When sitting 80% of the time on 50.180 calling CQ and the
> band scope set to 12.5 it gives me no advantage over you. I rarely use the
> band scope off 12.5. Setting a band scope to cover 200 kc in a contest will
> drive you nuts. Too many spikes including all the noise spikes too and as
> others have said, seeing a signal does not tell you if you worked that
> station before in a contest. Weak signals often cannot be discerned on a
> spectrum scope amongst the noise spikes. I hope you get a chance to try one
> for yourself. Thanks for your comments.
Hi Bill,
You made an excellent point. Just because a tool exists, doesn't make it the
best for the job. It is simply one tool in the arsenal. Just like your band
scope, CU2QSO is only one such tool in the arsenal. It's poor for looooong DX,
but it's excellent for making sure that you find and work every CU2QSO activated
Rover within a 2-grid radius (9-grids total). How many of us can say that we
worked every rover in the 4-closest grids in January? Not many...but you could
have, with CU2QSO. That sounds like fun to me. :) If it doesn't sound like fun
to you, don't do it.
In fact, had you been active using the system, you may have well worked me last
weekend. I'm on the south shore of Lake Ontario and wonder how many rovers I
missed because my antennas were pointed south most of the time.
Take time to explore all of the tools available to you and maximize using the
ones that you feel that you can now. More will come with time. Mark didn't get
to be a top 15 national contender overnight. He took the time to explore
options, learn what worked best for his style and maximize from there.
Welcome to VHF contesting. You hold a revered callsign. Hans Peters was a
friend to many. Here's wishing you continued success in your endeavors. With
any fortune, we'll see you at a Rochester VHF Group event in the future, too.
Warm regards,
Ev Tupis, W2EV
|