[UK-CONTEST] ARRL DX

[Roger G3SXW]

Sorry chaps, cock-up on the SXW front.

EF8M made over 11 million points in CQWWCW, not 11 thousand QSOs. Oops - I 
typed too fast. He made 7,355 gross QSOs for an average of 153 for the 48 
hours. He turned away most dupes (another discussion subject) and operated 
about 47.5 hours. On all bands above 80 mtrs his rate meter (clock hour) was 
showing over 170 per hour - if it dropped below that for several minutes he 
changed bands. See:

http://rd3af.com/articles.php?lng=en&pg=303

My personal best is 221 per hour (from 1A0KM) but once you can get beyond 
180-ish I firmly believe that it is the pile-up situation which determines 
rate, not the operator's ability. This means loud signals, few but 
consistent callers, all slick operators at the other end, barely any repeats 
or fills needed at either end. CW speed is of course a factor: if it's the 
dream pile-up then I reckon that 40wpm is OK on DXpedition or in CQWW but 
those pile-up conditions are rare. It needs a big opening to North America, 
operating from a semi-rare location.
73 de Roger/G3SXW.






----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Wilson, G3VMW" <steve at g3vmw.demon.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] ARRL DX


> In message <mailman.24492.1267092928.3373.uk-contest at contesting.com>,
>
> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 07:38:41 -0000
> From: "Dennis Andrews, F5VHY" <f5vhy at wanadoo.fr>
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST]  ARRL CW
>
>>Out of interest, I also had a look to see if there was evidence that QRQ 
>>had helped our leading supporters of this
>> mode.
>>
>>Steve - G3VMW was one of the operators at P3F in a M/2 operation. Their 
>>best periods were 66/314. With two
>> operators running, I guess it's reasonable to divide these figures by two 
>> to arrive at single operator comparisons -
>>which gives 33/157.
>
> Dennis,
>
> Your assertion of dividing the P3F M/2 best period by two to give an
> indication of individual performance is I think, not quite realistic.
> For example, one of the guys could be on 160m or any other band that is
> just opening working multipliers, whilst the other could be running full
> tilt say on 20m at over 200/hour. This was often the case at P3F.
>
> I think Roger G3SXW's example puts the case very well where he refers to
> EF8M running all through the CQWW CW mostly at 42 wpm and making 11,000
> QSOs. 229/hour for 48 hours is an amazing performance and can only be
> achieved by operating at that sort of CW speed.
>
> At no stage did I say I could achieve those sorts of results, but it is
> what I aspire to and what I believe you need to do to actually win these
> major contests.
>
>>
>>Gerry - GI0RTN was with M6T where the best periods were 46/215 (actually, 
>>the very first hour of the contest).
>>Although you can't divide these by 2, if you check the log, it shows that 
>>the "run" operator (on 80m) made just
>>166 QSOs in the hour.
>>
>
> On 80m that is pretty good going I'd say?
>
>>
>>All very interesting stuff. I remain to be convinced but look forward to 
>>seeing either Steve or Gerry appearing above
>>my call in any contest results before I'm carted off to the geriatric 
>>home!
>
>
> You do say ANY contest Dennis?
>
> I see from the HFCC Robot covering the last 80m CW CC event (Feb 18)
> that we have claimed the following scores:
>
> F5VHY   LOW     96      Three As CG     Thu Feb 18 21:52 2010
> G3VMW   LOW     159     Brimham CG      Thu Feb 18 21:50 2010
>
> And yes, I know I have a geographic advantage, but then I don't have the
> advantage of your aerial farm.
>
> 73
>
> -- 
> Steve Wilson, G3VMW
> Bramham, Wetherby, West Yorkshire
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest