[PaQSO] why more dx interest than west coast?

Thu Oct 17 23:51:04 EDT 2013

A quick export from our log shows that N3KAE worked a total of 95 DX
contacts this year.

Quick facts:
1. Every one of them was worked on 20-15-10
2. Totals - SSB=54 CW=39 PSK=2
3. That is a total of 136 QSO points
4. Which for us is a total of 19856 points (146 Mults)

So that "one" Multiplier accounted for over 5% of our total score.  And,
the overall time spent on those higher bands yielded even more Mid-West US
and Western US Multipliers.

Al, N3KAE

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:12 PM, <ka3qlf at comcast.net> wrote:

>
> 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
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>