[UK-CONTEST] 80M CC Contests

[Jim Martin - MM0BQI]

>From a northern (Edinburgh) perspective this is a change for the better.  My 
totals in January were 7, 9 and 8 QSOs.  Conditions and QSO numbers slowly 
improved as the year went on..  It was a hard slog and on many evenings 
running less than 50w to a loaded dipole, a few feet above the roof,  seemed 
like a thankless task.
That is possibly why there were so few entrants from GM.  Although we seem 
to have lots of operators at the multi stations up here, when it comes to 
participation in national (smaller) contests many of these individual calls 
are never heard.   I wonder where these operators learn the skills required 
to operate the multi stations during the three or four major contests each 
year?
Moves to increase participation and make short contest fun and accessible 
are to be applauded.
73
Jim,  MM0BQI
Summer Isles Radio Club


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lee Volante" <lee at g0mtn.freeserve.co.uk>
To: "UK Contest" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:46 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] 80M CC Contests


> Hello Ian,
>
>> I guess I hadn't realised that contests were supposed to be easy.
>>
>> 73 Ian G3WVG
>
> You're completely right - contests are not meant to be easy.  However, as
> one of the supporters of this particular change in the 80m CCs,  I hope I
> can explain a little of my personal reasoning for why I'm happy to see the
> change. To quote yourself from January this year....
>
>> Happy New Year...
>>
>> 80 was very noisy with me (in Surrey) and UK Stations were , with a few
>> exceptions, weak and watery.  But activity  seemed high with most of the
>> usual suspects wkd.
>> Finished with  100Q's using a TS930 running 100W and a dipole at 60ft.
>>
>> 73  Ian G3WVG
>
> What might your post have read if you were running 10 watts, to a dipole 
> at
> around 20 feet ?  If the prime focus of this contest is to motivate new
> entrants, everyday radio club members, running average stations, then
> removing the risk of poor propagation should remove frustration and bring
> more people 'into the running.'   Most people can work the 'usual 
> suspects',
> but the many summary sheet comments mention not being able to work folks
> through lack of useful propagation.  There are plenty of other events in 
> the
> calendar where entrants are need to operate in challenging conditions.
>
> If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, and after next year's events the overall
> feedback might suggest we change things back to the way they were, or to 
> try
> yet another variant. But from the number of negative comments concerning
> propagation from most of the six January 2004/5 CW/Data/SSB events, the
> change will hopefully be preferred by the majority.  I admit at least one 
> of
> these events was coincident with an aurora which exacerbated the problem.
>
> e.g. "If all contest were as hard as this was I would give up radio
> tommorow. Conditions were terrible"
> "Got the feeling that many gave up by 21:00 hrs as condx bad."
> "Never had so many stations who couldn't hear me!"
> "About the kindest description of inter-G conditions was 'dire'! Several
> were unprintable"
>
> There are plenty more to read on rsgbhfcc.org - they don't exactly inspire
> running the event the same way next year - or perhaps for entrants to 
> carry
> on for the rest of the season.
>
> Also if propagation is favouring skip into Europe, then there's 
> possibility
> of upsetting the other band users who could be forgiven for hoping that 
> the
> band segments would be free of contest activity and QRM outside of the
> weekends.
>
> The above comments are all my own and not representative of any committees
> etc. etc.
>
> 73,
>
> Lee G0MTN
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.4/175 - Release Date: 2005-11-18
>
>