and spent the CQ DX MM (Manchester Mineira) I was waiting with considerable anxiety. The general idea was to implement in a position to contest all the innovations made at the station since last participation in ARRL Int'l DX (CQ WPX SSB was from LU3HS/LQ5H ). The notes of every aspect of capturing go in the sections below. The summary of the participation was prefijos/45 279M72 countries ( 279M117) which was above the planned target of 220M100 and only slightly below the target maximum 300M100 . The total score was more of 135000 which was slightly below the score that reached first in the category last year (PY2WC to 138,195) which was itself a record. I had no expectation of achieving such a score would be and should be noted that due to the international opening this year will be significantly higher scores. Just enough to see that the reflector 3830 it appears PY2WC 1019M194 a claim and more than 730K points (!!!!). Moreover, this score is called mine and has no clearance yet (let alone given final clearance by the organizers). I think realistically a decline of 20% should be reasonable and I put in the environment of 100K not mediate some catastrophe (such as rupture of AATest database in the previous contest) will not know how the other competitors and if it will achieve to be among the top 5 of the class, but I think it's a result that makes me extremely happy.
PLANNING
The plan was shared participation in several previous posts, but preparations were in two areas. On the one hand the characteristics of the competition itself because it is a first participation, in addition to being the first edition of the competition world-wide. On the other hand, the station received a significant number of changes, perhaps more those who are wise to become at once (assuming you want to keep everything tidy), but perhaps too much order would remove some of the fun. The runplan I did with the previous contest results assuming that would be representative of this plus a couple of assumptions about how it would behave the spread. Regarding changes in the station was just to see how they all work together. My participation was planned from the outset SO AB QRP (the AB is implicit because the SB do not consolidate as a power QRP), that has its own challenges as he did while he had no involvement AB, although I certainly I was ready (much!) for better performance in it. I have not clear whether from the perspective of the organizers is good or not there is a category SO SB QRP, in fact there are competitions (such as CQ WW WPX ) where they exist and others (such as ARRL ) where not. Clearly not the same specialize the station for a band (SB) to do it to all (AB), in fact I think they are different stages of maturity. In my now more SB suits me better than AB , especially for 10 Mts and especially for QRP . As I shared on a previous occasion my strategy is to participate in Single Operator (SO) and CW contests a scheme M / S / M modes. From the perspective of the organizer would likely make the bulk of less than 5W low power (QRP) is concentrated in 10 Mts probably with little or no competitive participation in other bands creating a problem of lack of critical mass there. From the perspective of participant involvement consolidate QRP Low Power (LP) and even High Power (HP) is meaningless, is to play a poker hand of David Copperfield and without seeing the cards (and sleeve) except as only question is to participate in some form or test something with a view to future participation. To partially mitigate the novelty of the competition participated in a webcast made by the organizers the previous Sunday basically read the rules and there were some (few actually) " tips (recipes) to improve the performance contester, it was not as extensive half-hour and was a nice experience (novel at least). No reason was because I could not ask questions because when you opened the dialog to make my audio bridge apparently did not reach the server WebCast. Nor was he had no key question was more for the inconvenience thank and congratulate the organizers for their hard work that surely had to do, unfortunately I could not do it if I would have liked.
PROPAGATION AND COMPETITION
The spread was marked by a high solar flux (SFI greater than 119) I think good and early conditions in both Europe and USA, the conditions to other continents was not perceived, if they existed, as there were no participants from other continents have had the opportunity to contact. I think the main contacts were limiting the number of stations rather than the limitations of the spread. In any case, the spread (or lack thereof) and participants contributed by various geographies are intertwined in delineating what was the real run obtained.
As a difference to planning the largest number of stations was contacted Brazil (31%) followed closely by USA (27%) , this order is reversed from what was suggested by the analysis of the previous edition where the participation of U.S. stations was much waiting. In third place comes Germany (4%) , followed by Canada and Argentina (with about 3% each) . Overall 12 countries take the 80% of contacts (almost half of Europe) while 33 countries take the remaining 20% \u200b\u200bof contacts .
Participation led continental South America (SA) leads with 43% contacts, North America 35% contacts and Europe with 22% remaining. Perhaps to some extent my QRP operating condition significantly limits the scope, but there were very few stations that actually listen rather than unable to work more or less effort. So no major conditions or no participants (or both) I think is the most plausible explanation. While
NA and Europe combined gave me 37 multipliers, due to the particular rules of the contest (and clearly motivated to compete with South-American stations) SA gave me 11 and 50 multiplier prefixes (61), clearly showing the strong regional bias to be printed. In fact, this rule affects mostly motivate the participants as each continent compete separately (but the winner is the last spot, or the South Americans are at an advantage). Brazil, with 24 prefixes provided, is by far the largest amount in South America provides.
run analysis in itself shows that reached an average of just over 12 QSO / Hr (about 23 hours share) to 9 QSO / Hr he had taken as a premise for plan, as I said the result untreated reclaimed 287M117 is , it is curious that while the 36-hour format is my participation is very different from the competitions of 48 hours, in general I have work commitments on Saturday morning and that means that in any case is in that segment. Moreover, the use bands are operating from before and after 10 meters participation makes a little more extensive than usual, thus serving as a counterweight.
I'm actually starting to conclude that with some unusual effort is perhaps possible to be more hours, but not how realistic is to try to pursue more ambitious objectives in this regard, with perhaps 12 hours a day of participation is challenging enough to keep the concentration for so long. Interestingly I also had to take breaks at times of interest rates for being tired, I have to analyze more carefully as to whether the number of hours (and rate multipliers) it should be as much as possible or reserved for peaks. There will always be the question of how to know when there will be more activity, but give the impression that I was slowly taking shape in my head what the pattern of involvement seen from my home in that schedules mean that type of activity.
An interesting point to complete the demographics of the contest is to note that the Contact the total 14% corresponded to Estacions Multi (suffix M), 6% to G, the 5% to QRP and a little less than 1% to ladies (suffix Y). Will have to see the final results to understand if these percentages show that I took a proper crossover segment of the population or if I bias of some kind (you can study and apply information cubes unlimited data mining in this area, it hurts that it takes time) .
The profile of the run (figure) shows that the " bubble" of activity is anticipated to plan some were less intense than planned and also lasted a little more than planned.
As a result on the first day while the rate of contacts was not much higher than planned the absolute number of contacts if it was and therefore the profile was close to maximum. Something similar happened the second day with one planned but not scheduled, participation of European stations followed by a peak in U.S. stations on 10 meters that did not appear in the expected magnitude. The predominance of multipliers segments were approximately as planned (which is surprising given the lack of experience in the competition and the limited experience in AB). Make sharp turns to the importance of a consistent planning objectives and to map the area envelopes "comfort " is invaluable when you are in the competition and should make decisions based on how you come. Such as the decision to hit hard towards the end of the competition trying to stack QSO (though the run would be limited) in bands that had initially suggested the most appropriate planning for S & P. In plain language, trying runs on 20 and 40 meters at QRP, what if it is not clear is far from being a reasonable plan.
profiles contacts (QSO) for each band have a little history of participation, I got into the contest late and therefore the activity began to run in 10 meters. During the first three hours of the contest I had trouble configuring SO2R (later discuss in detail) so the ability to work in multi-band was low, then the pace quickened and the ability to operate in more than one band was limited . The run on 10 meters remained almost until 7pm local time. When I SO2R operating the band of 21 MHz (15 meters) began to gain importance as a source of contacts (and especially multipliers) almost exclusively operated simultaneously with 10 meters. An excursion to 14 MHz sporadic fishing for some multiplier spoter "or to see if the band had a good performance some multiplier enabled more but in general with a lot of work, a little because 20 meters leads to a kind of operation that is not friendly to QRP, a little because the conditions were not so good and partly because ultimately the booster station has only a vertical antenna comparison with the directional run. Then I jumped to 7 MHz where I could hold run for a few moments but I work most of the stations I could hear, a few that I could not piled QSO U.S. and Europe but I guess its antennas pointed at me or at least it did not reach with them, strengthens the argument that some stations were known that HP listened quietly. The second day had a similar pattern, though having started a little 10 meters before when it was still open (or was too little and Brazil) began the run on 15 meters with 10 meters and then multiplying I exchange (swap) so I kept the best rate that gave me the combination of ability to spread with participants to the place where I spent 18 hours for a while on for 15, 20 and finally ended up at 40 meters where he finished the contest with a good catch of multipliers. As I mentioned previously the U.S. run was shorter and less intense than I expected and participation was important stations in Europe (there was another contest simultaneously and in some cases I was in doubt by reports that happened to me if were in MM or otherwise).
Many Americans on Sunday a bit lost, through reports such as " TX 599" or "599 001 " or even "599 " plain, I hope they send the checklog at least. The behavior of the multipliers is the story further, 10 meters was pretty poor in general but gave the multipliers 15 and 40 meters were an equally important source of multipliers on Sunday the final 20 meters was also the contributions of many, I think it was an important learning how to operate the booster station. We must improve the technique (and especially the operation) but the idea basic is this.
can be seen in the following chart below as are the relative contributions of the different bands.
The marginal contribution graph shows the relative contributions a number of QSOs and multipliers on each band. You can clearly see that 10 meters is the largest contributor to poorer contacts and multipliers, while between 15 and 40 meters are 40% multipliers with 20% of the contacts on 20 meters, the activity was both QSO and multiplier (10% each) and finally at 10 meters was more than 75% the QSO but only half of the multipliers. These figures I think are important (although it must be factored by aspects of propagation) for future planning of units All Band. When there is no need to use intuition and experience when there are none of the two is to use data, " in God we trust, all others bring data me" is the famodo said W. Edward Deming that somehow way to mark the criteria that must be addressed improvement processes. There are many conclusions to draw, but the first and most obvious is that most QRP station if it is not prepared to AB will have to be willing to do half of the score, my season is actually set to QRP but can also LP operate without But we should not rule out a priori what can be done with QRP on the lower bands and how this changes the outcome. Resta comment that although I tried, the spread at 80 meters (and the dipole antenna configuration that I have) not been sufficient not only to work but even for a station to listen a station at the end of the contest each additional contact a new band meant as 900 + points for the next 300 + QSO and multiplier-side (1200 dots .... a single contact with two or three would have made me). It is no secret that my season is not very competitive at 80 meters (HF knew the Argentine edition 2010) but not to the point of not making any contact. The static and weather patterns over Argentina on Saturday night did not help. Maybe it's a side effect of having advanced the date of the competition in more than a month on the traditional Manchester Mineira (all Americas).
STATION NOTES
Test station was the first reason why DX CQ MM caught my attention, then so would other reasons, but somehow remained the most important. The amount of changes, innovations and improvements were significant, but for now my goal is to participate in CQ WPX CW 2011 (although there is a doubt for a family commitment on the intensity that I can spend) and before that in Argentine HF, but most of the changes affecting the first but less so to the second. The Argentine championship HF has a single-band format and of short duration that does not require most of the facilities and settings that I tested (although others such as new equipment and platform N1MM if applicable). As in all tests, and discusses the evidence that there are things go as planned (or better) and others having a problem (or not go). In this contest had a bit of everything.
Let's start with a positive tone. The vertical antenna Hustler 4BTV (installed in settings 3BTV ) went magnificently in 10 and 15 meters, also went on 20 meters but with a slightly lower performance. While transmatch need for adjustment, in practice the adjustment is minimal between 10 and 15 meters as well as minor in 20 meters, so that in practice it behaves like a change allowing multiband band very agile in the role of multiplier. Overall I gave a good performance multi-tasking, especially on 15 meters and even 10 meters (as the run was in the same band), with greater difficulty could also handle multiples of 20 meters. In some parts I tried the half-wave vertical antenna for 10 meters Walmar he walked like the Hustler in performance.
A second test was to inaugurate the newly acquired using a Yaesu FT-840 , for various reasons, newly arrived on Thursday night and hardly had time to put into operation a lot less to get familiar with or place in a suitable position from the ergonomic standpoint. I connected as I could, it attaches to CAT from the station as well and I learned to use it in basic form as quickly as I could. Even so and despite having enjoyed his best performance I had enough problems to take advantage. In fact, I'm not sure the problems with non-CAT in fact partially attributable to the position in previous tests, CAT does not walk or to a fraction of the evil of what he did in the contest.
N1MM platform had its baptism contester in my season and did well in regard to logger functions and do not function so well in the integrated operation of the station, although not entirely attributable to it. During the contest put in place the automatic activation of SO2R station, but so many problems I had I ended up spending the N1MM to manual mode so that I operated most of the competition. Having a PC station " multiplier", which strictly speaking not necessary because SO was operating, met its goal of having a transparent and reliable data base have mirrored the contest. It also helped me when I went to manual mode to explore the cluster but only temporarily. For his part did not help to have a screen to monitor the progress of scores (except in a very primitive and reports to that effect) since the multiplier reflects their activities (and a summary of the run) but not other nodes (logical if you like watching it in perspective). Had any idea of \u200b\u200bclearing space on the screen showing some things in another PC but I do not walked. Grayline I run the program and other display DXAtlas which partly relieved lack of space.
Run On the machine was quite crowded space, the two dialogues of entry and the two or three N1MM subsidiary has had to add the two spectrogram of filters and two CAT controls (HamPort). That without the bandmap that when he used were two dialogues. In summary, a screen very congested. It can operate by the way, and be light years ahead of when they did the same with pencil and paper, but I still think it would be better to have a second LCD to spread a little much information. I do not know how strong justification but it looks like I will try, with some courage, show in the family context to justify the importance of spending (vs. a couple of handfuls of other things more priority, of course).
Another thing I was able to walk only marginally was the role of objectives (goals), that although the program with no runplan got to give anything to have a goal of zero. I solved it by putting a goal of 20 QSO / Hr for the entire contest and that gave me a good idea of \u200b\u200bhow fast or "ironed" was the activity. It is a good indicator, but I have to work harder to understand how to configure and in particular to be taken for each time the goal that has run for the plan.
One of the features that I thought would help me but it did not notice it was so spot since I "spot" as LU7HZ/QRP this warning did not appear in the Info screen, and before either knew it did in the gearbox. The only way to explain the sudden changes in the flow of participants was watching the bandmap and see me there as "NEW" (more difficult to do among all the other stations in the bandplan). I put a comment in the forum N1MM that this did not resonate.
SO2R control handling both audio and works perfectly well, and I mentioned I used the FT840 as rig1 and FT100D as rig2. The duo perfect job. The line from the waterfall filter (CwGet) or the control CAT (HamPort) worked very well for the contest. At first I had invested ears with teams (the team at left physically and with the filter screen to the right was right and vice versa). So he had to cross between what my eyes saw on the screen and pressed my hand into the driver as a result had to press twice (in addition to decentralize) every time you wanted to change. It was simple, one day to the next modified the driver to dialog button and position coincide, no more distractions and differences in eye-hand coordination (!!!). The audio driver paid for each minute spent to build it and more, in fact it was worth the effort to build in the previous week (the effort is not much, but times in the week before the contest were horribly tight). You can browse and make points as well as multipliers with ease virtually without abandoning the run. I got some time to do "dueling (CQ alternatively call one way or another) between 10 and 15 meters (as if to prove that it was). It's nice to dueling of course, but to take this on a scale of operational skill that I'm not yet.
integrated between N1MM CAT and complex applications on OmniRig not walk, and there were only details, in basic form is inoperable without further action. Basically when given control N1MM CAT to be "confused" with the commands from other platforms and tend to respond to garbage, more garbage of course. As a result the frequency of jumps erratically teams (at any arbitrary frequency) at any time you're in the middle of a run and suddenly change the sound ... transceiver frequency is set at 200 KHz (or 700 KHz or 2 MHz, o. ..). At the same time does not always react to changes in frequency, for example, one type in 28010 in the dialogue and the team is positioned in 28010, but the same N1MM (typing on the frequency) continues to set the previous frequency. (!!!) Annoying because if you make a contact in those conditions as loggea in the wrong band. Also at times he gives for wanting to put the team in "split" between the VFO (being the 2nd frequency at any crap) and try to force the 2nd frequency. At other times the VFO change erratically between A and B. ...
The multiplier is distracting, the run is frustrating because you may decide to make changes at any time, even in the middle of a QSO. The only solution is to pass it back to "Manual" (first run and then also the gearbox), not only loses the ability to work integrated the ability to use the cluster (and automatic spotting) but also made mistakes when hurriedly switched sides and does not follow the change by typing the "new" frequency.
in all it was a change in "reverse" because it did not work and will have to see how to fix it. Is not easy the problem. The most obvious solution would be N1MM OmniRig support, but the authors do not want to hear about (the issue goes beyond the technical, I smell a duel for the answers in this small town.) For his part so all programs that are behind OmniRig (through it) as N1MM want to use the serial port (for "dialogue" with the same CAT via radio) and it is not possible. Vspeed solve the problems of sharing the serial port itself, but does nothing to solve the problems of interaction and protocol generated when programs are informed that they are unprepared.
A facility that became apparent as I needed and I think you have to invest a few hours of effort (the other, and go ....) is the possibility of a CAT control software which allows simultaneous interactive manipulation between teams. At this time HamPort use, it requires to pass control to rig2 rig1 be turn off and on again (I do not know because, I suppose that another decision criterion with little boys DXSoft). As this is quite cumbersome I have two instances of the program as a set and once as rig2 rig1 (which in turn must be found between both loose window frames.) These two instances do not share anything and would be very useful to make such exchange (swap) between both teams (that passes rig1 rig2 frequency and vice versa, or stepping on the frequency and mode of a team with the other in any direction) that OmniRig easily allows only that the programs do not implement it. Sometimes I work a multiplier (QRP) becomes difficult and would rather make a quick change to the run and shoot at least better antenna.
All programs are well Sencillito, there astrophysics around, but everything takes time of course. With such a thing would be more like SO2R SO2V that even I have the name! PMSO2V be called (Poor Man SO2V), how about?
if I still do a rearrangement of the physical layout of equipment, the two screens I have to add a chair more comfortable and able to somehow have the teams in front of me, but it makes no sense to make such use of time if Then must come the Yaesu FLDX2000 and I'll have to re-distribute it. The management of antennas also requires some accommodation. There are currently 4 operational HF antennas (directional, two vertical and dipole 80 meters) that would add to operating the 40 meter dipole (which is very low, but not right). We must find a way to connect more rational than live perpetually screwing and loosening coaxial connectors and making whips going from one place to another. Perhaps it should be the station for a hand and arm contester corner on the other to be enabled once a month or anything like that, but there must be some way that can have a configuration that is useful for all uses ( ragchew, satellite, digital, find, DX and Contest).
CONCLUSIONS
I think the balance of both the involvement of the assessments I made is very positive. Have expected so many changes and who walked all without problems was simply not realistic. I still outstanding improve my ability to handle more nimbly run slowly because I work in different facets of the season for me to be the bottleneck. Looking at the preliminary results in the reflector 3830 to see that level of ability to work multipliers'm on par with leading stations (in QRP as well as LP and HP). For example, PX7C that claimed scores level is leading SOAB LP was 99/61 (prefixes / countries) and SOAB QRP PY2WC leader was 125/69, while 117/45 I did, that is fine. But PX7C PY2WC made 558 QSOs and 1019 as I did 279 (all claimed scores emphasize). This means that there is a very good ability to work as multipliers but a much less developed to work in run; this is clearly the objective is to focus. It is also clear that I need a second antenna for 40 meters, but perhaps a dipole location and height better than I have, to better complement SO2R station, today as I have one really good antenna on 40 meters or move the main station or do not do 40 meters to go, play the game by the multipliers 'easier' with the gearbox which is slightly less effective is attractive and effective. Saco
several lessons in operating but especially in the technical, but not in the Argentine HF or in the CQ WPX think using assisted modes of integrating the subject N1MM to automatic control of the station is important as resolved as well as a small project to have a CAT controller a bit more friendly (if not, I'll finish to finish writing something he did not want).
begins in priorities to be increasingly higher the layout of the station and the various components.
Finally, the contests are like a giant "matryoshka " each time we open one doll inside another smile awaits.
0 comments:
Post a Comment