[CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented?

[Zack Widup]

Hi Herb,

Good to see you here!

I just checked my logs. I worked KP4KE on three bands. On all three
bands he sent me the power level of 100.

73, Zack W9SZ


On 2/26/14, Herb Schoenbohm <herbs at vitelcom.net> wrote:
> This is my first post on this reflector and I do so with caution but
> extreme concern that contests at least stay somewhat competitive in all
> categories.  I must admit in 50 years of enjoying contests I have never
> quite seen anything like this and it is repeated year after year.  I
> don't want to make false accusations but some station claiming to be QRP
> "3.7 watts in the past or in this case "42 watts" as published on the
> 3830 Reflector recently, are claims so far beyond credulity that careful
> examination is warranted by their claim.
>
> Why am I concerned?.....  Each year contest visitors come to this part
> of the world to operate, some just for fun, but others the spend
> significant money to build fine contest stations. There efforts, their
> country multipliers  are appreciated. Their efforts are as they should
> be, duly lauded.  However what is troublesome is those who come all they
> way to the Caribbean and try to compete but have their efforts ruined by
> others who should get the Contest Committee Pinocchio award, rather than
> a beautiful plaque.  My reference is for a particular station for
> claiming to be QRP in the past with 3.7 watts and running the tables or
> in this case "42 watts" as was the case with one entry in the ARRL CW
> contest this month with a nearby SOAB LP category.  My contest station
> NP2P is a an adequate contest station with good antennas from near the
> ocean and runs 1500 output to an Alpha 87A.  Of interest is the
> comparison during the ARRL CW contest of SOAB-HP of NP2P and the SOAB-LP
> of KP4KE who made the claim on the 3830 Reflector that his power was
> only 42 watts.  Rather then make some wild accusation I sincerely ask to
> look at the RBN signal levels for both stations at the same time on the
> same band. If you can believe him I would like to talk to about buying
> shares in my new St. Thomas to St. Croix bridge project.  Here is the
> rationale:
>
> Just go to RBN and put in a spot analysis at any location on the
> mainland for the ARRL DX CW this month.   Pick any reporting station
> like W3LPL or AA4VV or WA7LNW and compare, for Saturday February 15,
> 2014, the signal levels of KP4KE (42 watts) and NP2P (1.5KW) especially
> on the low bands. Antennas on the low band are essentially the same.
> KP4KE claims (3830 report) that has a dipole at 60' on 80 and so does
> NP2P. (NP2P is 65 feet ABG.  He claims on 40 meters a delta loop at 70'
> and NP2P has a dipole at 65 feet.  Now do you know how his claim of 42
> watts to these antennas can outperform similar antennas into the
> mainland locations against a station that is running (NP2P) 1500 watts?
> Look at the low band analysis and please explain under what
> circumstances could provide for a station (KP4KE) so consistently
> stronger at the receiving RBN locations than another station (NP2P) in
> the same area running 35 times the power. At times the difference is
> over 10db or more in favor of the "42 watt station.".  What I am
> suggesting is that the evidence of a low power or as he claims "42
> watts" on the 3830 Reflector requires some careful and detail
> investigation. During the CQ 160 Meter SSB contest some differences were
> even more striking. I made some ground wave comparisons between the
> signals of Pedro, NP4A and the low power "42 watt" claim of KP4KE.
> Either the laws of propagation have changed over the years but I don't
> think they have. On ground wave I can tell the difference between a LP
> and a HP station 150 miles away on 160 meters. After the contest I even
> asked some European participants to let me know  how the two stations
> compared, one that claimed to be running low power and the other well
> engineered and well healed station at NP4A with 200 foot towers that on
> the low bands can open and close any propagation from here.  The remarks
> were, how can this station claim low power? "Impossible"  and on and on.
>
> This has been going on for many years. No other station can even fairly
> compete in future contests if this ruse goes unchecked. If I am wrong in
> my assessment, I think then the station owner in question should be
> scheduled for speaking engagements at numerous DX and contest confabs.
> Maybe even the Society of Broadcast Engineers would pay huge speaking
> fees for someone who can support their claims in having new propagation
> methods that reverse previous settled and proven theories.
>
> Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
> St. Croix, U.S, Virgin Islands
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>