>I remember the days when well-equipped single op stations operated well by
>the likes of K5NA and K1ZM used to come out ahead of the multiops
>occasionally. As competition drives the multiops to set up better stations I
>think that will happen much less frequently if ever again.
The difference is PacketCluster. I have used 2 radios for contesting since
the early 70s. The 160 meter contests were no exception. The drill is to
call CQ and listen with one ear while tuning the second radio that you are
listenning to with the other ear.
Before PacketCluster came along, that style of contesting in a
"single-band" contest made you just as competitive as any multi-op station.
It was certainly harder work than a multi-op, but it was effective if you
could stay with it and keep up the "two-ear" tuning. There were always a lot
of mults to work and nobody worked more than 60 or 70 percent of what was
available.
When PacketCluster came along, the tide turned to the multi-op stations.
Most multipliers were spotted and multi-op stations would rarely miss any
multiplier that came on the band. As a single-op I could still find mults
with my second ear, but by the time I found them the pile-ups were bigger
because they had probably been previously spotted. This made it harder for
me, as a single-op, to get in-and-out fast with a QSO and to properly time
that QSO while holding a running frequency on another part of the band.
Before PacketCluster, the mults I would find would have little if no pile-up
at all making the timing easy. Usually one call would have them in the log.
Not so in today's world.
In many ways, I think I enjoyed contesting more before PacketCluster. But
there is no going back now!
BTW, please make note of my new Internet ID here in Texas. It is K5NA@BGA.COM.
73, Richard - K5NA
K5NA@BGA.COM
|