[NLRS] [BC'ers] activity

Thu Sep 15 09:48:49 EDT 2011

Hi all;

I thought I would throw my 2 cents worth in here.......

I ran most of the contest this last weekend, and became quite disenchanted with the general low turnout.  Almost none of the Milwaukee regulars were anywhere near their radio's.  The Chicago contingent was way down as well.  I usually have nearly 150-200 QSOs in the log by the time I shut down on Saturday night, and generally double that by the end of Sunday night for the end of the test.  I know, I have not done the email 'blast' to the badger list as I have done in the past, mostly because of the excellent effort put forth in that department by Todd, KC9BQA.  This year, I had not even reached 100 Q's by 11:00 PM on Saturday, and had such a slow rate on Sunday, I basically quit to watch football and do yardwork by midday on Sunday.  I did get back on Sunday evening for about 3 hours, and found activity levels 'better'.

I ended with about 165 QSO's, and a ~25 K score.  (details in a future post) Usual for sept is ~400 Q's and 70-100K.

Conditions were average to below, which is unusual by Sept standards, and I missed the short AU, due to the wife's  leverage to run out to our favorite restaurant. (right smack when the AU happened)  But, I still have to credit the low turnout for a poor score.  I also observed a low number of rover's this year

I must admit, I have been 'running out of gas' the last few years.  I am now in my 60's, working in a company full of 30-somethings, who love the 50-60 hour workweek.  I usually come home, and take a quick nap!!  I have never been able to be truly competitive from my hilltop, which I initially judged to be a great VHF QTH.  The 2 major development with that QTH has been the large increase in noise in this neighborhood, thanks to Plazma TVs and HV power line noise, plus other consumer electronics; and the growth of my large hardwood trees, which have hampered my microwave efforts.  Because of this, I have given up totally on 2.3 gig and up.

Like Gregg, I have been drifting back onto HF, where I have been casually chasing DX on 40-30-20-17 meter CW with a stinkin little trap vertical!

It seems strange, because the FCC has been seeing 20-30K new hams every year, so there must be other factors.  Operator's age's may be one, which keeps some of us in the easy chair a little more in the evenings, or the heightened noise floors in much of the countryside and urban areas, which frustrate us to no end.  I hear many of the FM and repeater guys noting lower activity levels, so it is still hard to gauge cause and effect.

Ennyway, I keep playing radio, and look forward to some of the ol-timers like Gregg, Duane N9DG and others playing on the bands.

-----Original Message-----
From: badgercontesters-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:badgercontesters-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Gregg Seidl
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:58 PM
To: BadgerContesters at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [BC'ers] activity

Those of us who have been around on the vhf bands for more then 10 years and maybe even 20 years can rememebr when a simple CQ on 144.200 would bring several replies and even a CQ on 432.1 would bring them too. I can even remember a time or two calling CQ on 1296.1 during weekend nights would bring a reply.
The activity level has been declining for 10 years now and I can't explain why. I know I am partially to blame as my activity on bands above 6 has dropped to nothing. I still don't have my 2 meter stuff working again.
As most of you know or remember I had a fairly potent station and was on 6-1296 for a number of years. I can rememeber making 400-500 qso's on those bands in a contest weekend without being near a population center.
When I see some of the scores from the recent contest I don't understand why the activity levels are so low. There is way more gear now although it feels like it costs more then back in the day. I also think that the economy has taken its toll on ham budgets as well. I also think that the no-code surge we saw have gone on to other hobbies or hopefully on to the HF bands. I have been contesting a long time and I think HF contests are more active then ever. It seems to me that few hams who were contesting on VHF have now went to HF. The question is why,the HF bands haven't been that great until about a year ago. So why do I hear so many old VHF calls on HF now. In my opinion it is the way VHF contests are scored. 
Think about this for a moment, Joe Ham lives in in northern Wisconsin and his brother Bob Ham lives near Chicago. They are both 9 landers.They both have dipoles on 40 meters up in a tall maple tree about 50 feet up. They are going to work about the same number of QSO's everything being equal because there is no HUGE advantage,there is some maybe in Sweepstakes or maybe some DX tests but not that much.
Lets now take those those two brothers and put them on 6,2 and 432 with a 50 foot tower and big single beams. Who do you think will work more sations now?
Somehow distance needs to be accounted for in the scoring of VHF contests like it is in the 10 Ghz tests.
There are always exceptions to the rule but those stations near population centers or a group of great rovers will always win.
6 meters is a bit of an equalizer but it can not compare with 6 point microwave contacts or is it 8 points. I beleive most of the winning VHF stations have great microwave station and average to great 6 meter stations.
So there you have my 2 cents worth. I think I'll get back to 10 meters,it seems like it trying to open again.
BTW I hope to get my 2 meter stuff fixed this year yet.I am also working on a small 2 meter EME array and want to install a meduim 6 meter EME array. Anyone got some rohn 45 around?
Gregg  K9KL
______________________________________________________________
BadgerContesters mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/badgercontesters
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:BadgerContesters at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html