Noticed on Saturday last week that the log check reports for the 2009 ARRL 160m contest had been posted on the ARRL website.\u00c2\u00a0 How I found them, I’m not sure.\u00c2\u00a0 The ARRL site has been well shuffled.\u00c2\u00a0 In my life as a DP professional, it was important to stress the significance such sweeping change would have to the hapless victims – i.e., the poor folks who actually used the program interfaces to get their jobs done.<\/p>\n
Its like this – the hapless victims(in this example ME) had a working knowledge of “how it works”.\u00c2\u00a0 That knowledge was reinforced by 0 to 20(eleven) years of hands on habitual training.\u00c2\u00a0 Sometimes that is good, sometimes not good. Tossing these years of “habit”\u00c2\u00a0 is often more or less equivalent to firing the entire staff and starting with fresh high school grads.\u00c2\u00a0 Sometimes that sort of drastic change was required to achieve the goals.\u00c2\u00a0 More often it was just done on the whimsy of the dork making the decisions.\u00c2\u00a0 So – whimsy or requirement? But I digress into grumpy Old Fart-ville….<\/p>\n
Yet I am smiling.\u00c2\u00a0 The LCR, once found, is for me one of the best things about the ARRL contests.\u00c2\u00a0 It is a blow by blow breakdown of what was screwed up.\u00c2\u00a0 In this case the 2009 ARRL 160m LCR is better news than most.\u00c2\u00a0 It’s the best CW LCR I have had – ever.\u00c2\u00a0 On 201 QSO’s I busted only 2 calls, and had one exchange busted.\u00c2\u00a0 O’course, it was only 200 Q’s total, but improvement is always good.<\/p>\n
Operating for only about four hours, about half of the QSO’s were from runs, and the rest from S&P.\u00c2\u00a0 The rate was low by Bigg Gunn standards, but about normal for the low power 160m KazShack.\u00c2\u00a0 This low error rate even beat out a lot of my SSB LCR’s.\u00c2\u00a0 It may in fact be the best LCR for any of my contests, either mode. SWEEEET!<\/p>\n
Now, I just need to get the Sweepstakes log(and every other log) to be as good as this ARRL 160m log.\u00c2\u00a0 Sweepstakes was terrible.\u00c2\u00a0 In 2008 most of the errors were on the exchanges.\u00c2\u00a0 2009 CW Sweeps was a step backwards, with more callsign busts.<\/p>\n
Sure wish I knew what was different – it would be better to have more logs like the 160m ‘test.\u00c2\u00a0 The ultimate goal is a 500 QSO CW contest log with zero errors.<\/p>\n
When pigs fly…..for now I would be happy with a consistently low error rate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Noticed on Saturday last week that the log check reports for the 2009 ARRL 160m contest had been posted on the ARRL website.\u00c2 How I found them, I’m not sure.\u00c2 The ARRL site has been well shuffled.\u00c2 In my life as a DP professional, it was important to stress the significance such sweeping change would have to the hapless victims – i.e., the poor folks who actually used the program interfaces to get their jobs done.<\/p>\n
Its like this – the hapless victims(in this example ME) had a working knowledge of “how it works”.\u00c2 That knowledge was reinforced by 0 to 20(eleven) years of hands on habitual training.\u00c2 Sometimes that is good, sometimes not good. Tossing these years of “habit”\u00c2 is often more or less equivalent to firing the entire staff and starting with fresh high school grads.\u00c2 Sometimes that sort of drastic change was required to achieve the goals.\u00c2 More often it was just done on the whimsy of the dork making the decisions.\u00c2 So – whimsy or requirement? But I digress into grumpy Old Fart-ville….<\/p>\n
Yet I am smiling.\u00c2 The LCR, once found, is for me one of the best things about the ARRL contests.\u00c2 It is a blow by blow breakdown of what was screwed up.\u00c2 In this case the 2009 ARRL 160m LCR is better news than most.\u00c2 It’s the best CW LCR I have had – ever.\u00c2 On 201 QSO’s I busted only 2 calls, and had one exchange busted.\u00c2 O’course, it was only 200 […]<\/p>\n