[Mldxcc] FD Analysis

[Jeff Stai]

1. Where was the 15m antenna located, and what was it? The next question is what can we do to increase takeoff angle or to simply widen the vertical pattern? I think we need to be there on 15 when it opens. And ready for 10 if it happens (like it did this past weekend on RTTY). Perhaps a 2 element antenna like a Moxon would serve us better at that location...

2. Being on 20 on two modes makes sense. The K2/100 is especially known for its ability to handle nearby strong signals in-band.

3. How many digital contacts did REDXA make? We are giving up a lot of CW-equivalent contacts by not being on PSK or RTTY when CW or phone get slow.

4. We're never going to get that number of VHF contacts. But we can do better by trying to get as many stations as possible in all three modes. Perhaps somehow we can get the word out to try CW and even PSK on 6m, and move stations from 6m phone to the other modes and bands as much as possible...

just my random thoughts - j


At 03:51 PM 10/18/2005, Richard (Rick) Karlquist (N6RK) wrote:
>15 seemed to be location dependent.  I could hear W6YX running
>stations on 15 that we could not even hear.  This is because
>(I am speculating) the mountains to the east block low angle
>signals.  Being on the cliff doesn't help with this issue.
>The best thing we can hope for is that next year, nobody
>can do anything on 15.
>
>This is consistent with my observation that the guy on the
>hill or with very high towers has the advantage during marginal
>band conditions.  If the band is closed, even he doesn't work
>anything.  If it is wide open, then everybody can work everything.
>2005 was the "perfect storm".
>
>What we can do to get on 20 phone and 20 CW at the same time,
>in case 40 isn't doing well.  As I remember, 40 CW was pretty
>good Sunday morning, so maybe we weren't missing much.
>
>Rick N6RK
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com
>> [mailto:mldxcc-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Venneman
>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 4:45 PM
>> To: MLDXCC
>> Subject: [Mldxcc] FD Analysis
>> 
>> 
>> OK,
>>  
>> I did the analysis of our FD score vs. that of REDXA that I 
>> mentioned in my previous posting. Here's the results,
>>  
>> While we made 250 more QSOs than they did on 80 meters and we 
>> pretty match broke even on 40 meters, they really "cleaned our 
>> clocks" on 20 and 15 meters. They made 550 more QSOs on 20 than 
>> we did and around 600 more than we did on 15. (Note - we went 
>> into this year's FD with an assumption that conditions on 15 
>> would not be that great, based on 2004 results - guess we were 
>> wrong). REDXA also maxed out their GOTA station allowance of 400 
>> QSOs and had 147 6-meter QSOs to our 56. 
>>  
>> Is their location really that much better than ours? I ask that 
>> question because I am not familiar with their FD location. It did 
>> not appear, based on what we were hearing over at the GOTA 
>> station, that 15 meters was that great, except on Sunday morning. 
>> I would imagine that having a pool of fresh operators available 
>> was good for several hundred extra contacts. We were  stretched 
>> pretty thin for operators this year, although both stations 
>> stayed on all night for the first time.
>>  
>> Any comments or suggestions relevant to this analysis that we 
>> could use for our 2006 FD entry are appreciated.      
>>  
>> Thanks,
>>  
>> Jim  -WX6V-
>> MLDXCC FD Coordinator
>>  
>> (Note to Rick - Please put this analysis in our club newsletter 
>> for November for those that did not see this reflector posting - Thanks!)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mldxcc mailing list
>> Mldxcc at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/mldxcc
>> 
>> 
>_______________________________________________
>Mldxcc mailing list
>Mldxcc at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/mldxcc

--
Jeff Stai               jds at twistedoak.com
Twisted Oak Winery      http://www.twistedoak.com/