[UK-CONTEST] GB5HQ - G3LET's analysis

[Steve Wilson, G3VMW]

In message <mailman.1618.1152458025.1371.uk-contest at contesting.com>, 
G3LET writes

Peter,

I must echo some of the comments made by other GB5HQ operators and I'm 
amazed at the insensitivity of your comments.  I was one of the 
operators at the GB5HQ station at Brough in East Yorkshire operating on 
80 and 10m CW.  Maybe I can offer a few extra comments, given that I 
actually did stay QRV on 10m CW until 0200 after which I had a four hour 
kip until 0600 - then I operated the 80m CW station.


>Well, I took the K2 with me on this trip, largely to see whether any of the
>adverse comments made earlier on re selection of stations/operators had any
>justification in practice. Comments are as follows:
>
>1. Although most were fine, some of the night and even a few of the day ops of
>GB5HQ stations weren't in the same league as the major competitors. One or two
>were down-right embarrassing to listen to.

That is entirely a personal opinion and one which you are entitled to. I 
disagree from my experience since I was here at home for the first two 
hours of the contest and worked or listened to quite a few of the 
operators.  I wasn't embarrassed when I listened, but maybe my knowledge 
of what constitutes top-line operating isn't as wide as yours?

>2. Although both 15 and 10 were (amazingly) open all night and most of the
>other HQ stations were taking full advantage of this, GB5HQ apparently went to
>sleep for much of the time.
>

You are correct - 10m WAS open all night and there were loud HQ 
stations, loud beacons AND more interestingly some HUGE 2nd harmonic 
signals from the 20m HQ stations appearing on 10m.

This worried me at first because I heard strings of W6 and W7 stations 
being worked on "10m" in the small hours on frequencies like 28096, 
which seemed unusual to say the least.

We had a pair of stacked 4 element monobanders at 85 and 65ft but I 
couldn't hear anything of these USA stations.  Then I realised what was 
happening and a check of 14 MHz revealed the true story.

Bottom line - there wasn't anything we hadn't worked on 10m until early 
morning, i.e. after 0500z.  You know as well as I do that you can only 
work them if you can hear them?

Perhaps you might have been justified to ask WHY there was little 
appearing to happen on 10 and 15m through the night, but please do NOT 
criticise when clearly you know only half the story.  Calling CQ 
interminably seems like a waste of time to me?

I was pleased to work you on 10m CW by the way.  I think I heard you 
first time and responded promptly without QSD?


>Conclusions:
>
>The concern expressed earlier that operators are selected for spurious networking
>or old-boy reasons appears at least partly justified. Although GB5HQ is "the
>station of the RSGB", the RSGB appears to have no involvement in the organisation
>of the entity that is representing them and remedying this would provide the
>missing transparency. A points system for qualifying operators, evidencing
>concrete past achievement, is clearly required.

You clearly know little about the workings of the RSGB.  To suppose that 
there is support for HF Contesting at Potters Bar is laughable - just 
ask the various present and ex-HFCC Chairmen that have struggled to make 
their (pro-contesting) views heard.  Were it not for the hard work and 
effort of people like Dave Lawley G4BUO, Justin Snow G4TSH and John 
Linford G3WGV (and many others) then GB5HQ would never happen.  If you 
think Peter Kirkby and the RSGB admin staff could organise GB5HQ and the 
points system for qualifying operators that you are suggesting then 
maybe you should think again?


>No more than 2 or at most 3 operators are needed in any band mode for a 24 hour
>event, assuming dual run and mult stations.
>

Indeed, that's about the ratio that existed - it certainly did at the 
G3LZQ station at Brough where we had the 80m CW and 10m CW stations. 
Four operators that's all - with some like me arriving late or leaving 
early.  What exactly is your point?


>A prestigious international event such as this is not the occasion for acquiring
>experience and expertise, but for demonstrating it. Perhaps it all comes down to
>the British way of doing things, however it would be interesting to know how the
>main competitors organise their arrangements. In the meantime, any expectation
>of winning from GB5HQ will need to involve an entirely ruthless (read non-PC)
>approach to organisation and manning. Compare with any other international
>sporting event: - one manager (NOT station managers) and he selects the team or,
>manager administers a team selected by results.
>

Who exactly do you suggest we ask to demonstrate "experience and 
expertise" in contesting at GB5HQ from the available UK contest 
operator's pool?  As others have said, the list of 2006 GB5HQ operators 
looked pretty good to me based on ability and experience.  Remember also 
that some of our best operators i.e. the likes of Fred G4BWP and Roger 
G3SXW were in Brazil acting as referees in the WRTC event.

Well from where I was sitting, i.e. behind the 10m CW station at the 
very end, it looked to me as if we had done pretty well on claimed 
scores compared to last year.  I think this was down to some magnificent 
efforts by my GB5HQ colleagues who seemed to me at least as if they were 
working well as a TEAM.  I was privileged to take part in and see the 
way stations were moved from band-to-band to score extra points and how 
the score improved exponentially as rare multipliers were passed via 
G3WGV's excellent Starlog.

As I have said, as far as I'm concerned the organisation was pretty 
good, but if you think you can do any better, perhaps you should contact 
the RSGB and offer your services as the 2007 GB5HQ Team Manager?

>Note the above is an observation, in an attempt to explain our lack of success in
>these events, despite the planning and investment by many of those concerned.

How do you define "lack of success" exactly?  The DA0HQ team always do 
well because of the way the German radio amateur population rally behind 
their HQ team and make lots of QSOs.  To some degree, I thought we were 
reasonably well supported by G callers, but inevitably, we never get the 
support that the Germans get.  That isn't an excuse - it is a fact.

Anyway, thanks for the vote of confidence.  It is always good to know 
that our collective efforts at GB5HQ were appreciated.

73

-- 
Steve Wilson, G3VMW
Bramham, Wetherby, West Yorkshire
Email: steve at g3vmw.demon.co.uk