[PaQSO] why more dx interest than west coast?

Thu Oct 17 23:12:54 EDT 2013

What Tom, N2CU said, I agree with. It is a catch 22, in a huge way. Us in state PQPers, tend to stay within our state for qso's. This became evident to me, the year I was out as a /M, with a driver, who wanted to keep on our posted schedule. There were so many qso;s to be had on 40M, from inside PA stations, there were several counties, I could not get to 20m, before I ran out of the county. I hear the same comments, from county hunters, as well as west coast stations. We also had the luxury this year, of an SSB dx contest. which, also used serial numbers as part of the exchange, so the exchanges melded in nicely. 

I know at N3KAE, we spent a good deal of time, on 10, 15, and 20. The stations were there to work, but I also know, in the PQP it can be very difficult to pull yourself away from the frenzy on 40M 

Scott, KA3QLF 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Goody K3NG" <goody.k3ng at gmail.com> 
To: "paqso" <PaQSO at mailman.qth.net> 
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 10:59:57 PM 
Subject: Re: [PaQSO] why more dx interest than west coast? 

I thought there was a lack of CA stations this time around. I think I 
worked only two sections. Usually I get a bunch more. And it wasn't for 
lack of propagation. I was calling CQ with QRP, they answered me, and they 
were strong signals. I also usually get ID, MT, and UT. Not this time. 

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Mark Schreiner <mark.j.schreiner at gmail.com 
> wrote: 

> Tim, 
> 
> Interesting observation. I would be curious to see what others have to say 
> as well. 
> 
> I'm happy to work as many mults as possible, as I think we all would be. I 
> think I only had one QSO with a station in CA, where there are many more 
> mults that can be worked. In the past, yes, I would get an occasional one 
> or two DX stations or so while trying to pick up more mults out west, just 
> as you said, Tim. Maybe if I had a yagi I could have done better into CA, 
> but if they aren't participating then it seems like a waste of RF. Several 
> years ago I did participate a little bit in the CAQP as well, hoping to 
> stir up some interest in the PAQP for the following weekend. Maybe after 
> they run all weekend they are burned out from radio for a bit, or have to 
> catch up on honey-do lists? I was surprised to not work many AZ stations, 
> and one of them whom I did work I asked if he was in the AZ QSO Party so I 
> could give him a contact for that (he said he was not). 
> 
> Missed Mults this year from my station, which I was running fairly simple 
> dipole-like antennas from the portable location, i.e. Carolina Windom, 
> Mystery Antenna and 40/20m Fan Dipole, we as follows (by call area): 
> 
> 0: KS, NE, SD 
> 1: ME, VT 
> 2: VI 
> 4: PR 
> 5: LA 
> 6: EB, LAX, ORG, PAC, SB, SDG, SF, SJV, SV (only got SCV) 
> 7: AK, ID, MT, UT, WY 
> VE: ALL BUT ON & QC 
> 
> I think I may have gotten more mults had I spent more time on 20/15/10m on 
> Saturday, but it was nice to hear 40m open across PA during the beginning 
> of the PAQP for a change (maybe it was like that last year also, I 
> forget). Maybe I would have missed a clean sweep, but in reality while a 
> clean sweep is nice, the highest score I could muster is what really should 
> matter, right? Okay, not counting possible individual goals, like if I 
> really tried to just get a clean sweep as a #1 priority I could give up 
> lots of other things, but then would likely not get as high of a score as I 
> may have had otherwise. I really don't mean to lay blame on those sections 
> I missed as I likely didn't spend as much time operating the higher 
> frequencies as I should have, and when band conditions are good, QRP really 
> cranks on those higher frequencies! 
> 
> While the Mystery Antenna is three half-wavelengths, I didn't put it up in 
> a specific orientation for max gain in any particular direction, I was 
> using the best layout of the trees that were available. 
> 
> Wow, those are a lot (33) of missed mults, though, that even a few of those 
> could really have boosted the scores nicely! 
> 
> Mark, NK8Q 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:28 PM, <morsenut at aol.com> wrote: 
> 
> > I just read NK8Q's summary...and if I am reading him right, there is 
> more 
> > active participation from DX stations than West Coast and VE stations in 
> > PAQP. 
> > 
> > While I am grateful for the DX stations, they do only 
> > Count as one multiplier and you typically work them when you are trying 
> to 
> > find West Coast, mid West, and Western multipliers. I missed at least 
> half 
> > of the West Coast multipliers and at least two thirds of the VE mults. 
> > 
> > Admittedly, I don't have a directional antenna on the high bands but this 
> > is still kinda frustrating because DX heard me on my simple dipole at 40 
> > feet on 20 and 15 meters, so what gives with W. Coast and other western 
> > multipliers? 
> > 
> > I know the high bands are propagating into the 6, 7, and 0 call areas 
> > because I DID get replies from there 
> > 
> > I can only conclude that, in relation to their numbers, that there is 
> > slack interest among the western mults in PAQP. 
> > 
> > That is a shame. 
> > 
> > The weekend before PAQP, I make it a point to work several stations 
> > calling the CAQP on 15 and 20 meters...even though I don't even submit a 
> > log, I just want to be there for them and hope they return the favor the 
> > following weekend. 
> > 
> > But it seems less than what I would expect and the DX stations are a 
> > welcome substitute, notwithstanding the single mult they represent. 
> > 
> > Anyone else have similar experience? 
> > 
> > Do tell. 
> > 
> > 73 All, 
> > 
> > Tim 
> > WU3U 
> > 
> > 
> > ______________________________**______________________________**__ 
> > PaQSO mailing list 
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/**mailman/listinfo/paqso< 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso> 
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.**htm< 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm> 
> > Post: mailto:PaQSO at mailman.qth.net 
> > 
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
> > 
> ______________________________________________________________ 
> PaQSO mailing list 
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso 
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
> Post: mailto:PaQSO at mailman.qth.net 
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
> 
______________________________________________________________ 
PaQSO mailing list 
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso 
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
Post: mailto:PaQSO at mailman.qth.net 

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