Tree wrote:
> > CU2QSO is not going to impact who is in the top ten.
>
> Not sure I agree with this. In the June 2002 contest, I came in second in my
> division behind N7AU. He paid better attention to tracker rovers than I did,
> and as a result, had a better multiplier. That was one of a couple of reasons
> he beat me.
Your last sentence says it all. No one weapon in any arsenal is enough to make
a successful contest operation (however the individual operator defines
"success"). It is up to each person to examine their resources and make
informed choices as to what to invoke and how to best spend their time.
Some "weapons" include:
o Hilltop locations
o High power amplifiers
o Antenna Arrays
o Use of HF IF's with high dynamic range transverters
o Mast mounted preamps
o WSJT's FSK441
o EME
o CW and narrowband filters
o Adding 10-, 24-, 47-GHz and LASER
You may now add: CU2QSO.
Kind regards,
Ev Tupis, W2EV
|