<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>All,</p>
<p>Jim W8WTS makes some very good points. <br>
</p>
<p>Basically, I believe including 160 would be a plus for big Ohio
stations and others within 200 miles of Ohio, but not so good for
small stations, mobiles and everyone else. If you're in Iowa,
Florida or California and many of the Ohio stations disappear to
160 during the last two hours to work each other, you may just
QRT. <br>
</p>
<p>When I was mobiling in the OHQP, the last hour on 80 was
typically my best hour of the contest. Allowing 160 would
probably adversely affect mobile rates. Not a good thing if you
want to encourage mobile activity. <br>
</p>
<p>The PAQP has included 160 for a long time, so looking over their
results might be instructive, although condx in October are a lot
different than August, and the PAQP two-day format makes it a very
different animal. When I operated the PAQP as a mobile, I felt
that I needed a 160 mobile antenna and I usually managed to make
an extra 60-80 contacts there, but I was very weak and could only
be heard when the band was quiet. Mobiling on 160 in August is
pretty much hopeless.</p>
<p>I guess it comes down to how the committee views the identity of
the Ohio QSO Party. Does it want to make the OHQP into a PAQP
with lots of instate action and not so much out of state
participation, or does it want to make it into a truly national
QSO Party? Right now, clearly the OHQP is much more like the
PAQP than it is like the FQP, the CQP or even the NEQP. If you
want to keep and enhance that character, adding 160 may help a
little. If the committee aspires to increase the national
character of the OHQP, perhaps they might consider giving more
points to high band contacts to lure more stations there instead
of adding 160. <br>
</p>
<p>Not an easy decision. Good luck.</p>
<p>73, Hal W1NN<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/15/2020 1:48 PM, James M. Galm,
W8WTS wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:007101d612e1$1d40dce0$57c296a0$@w8wts.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hello
Everyone, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
would argue against including 160 m, for a variety of
reasons. First, while there are stations that one can work
on 40 m that are not possible on 20 m, and there are
stations on 80 m that are not possible on 40 m, there is
absolutely no station that one can work on 160 m that cannot
be worked on 80 m. That is just a fact of mid-summer D
layer absorption. It is true that 160 m would add the
potential for additional QSOs (QSOs counting once per band
per mode) for those who have access to 160 m, but that tends
to be the larger stations. 160 m does not create any new
multiplier opportunities, since mults are once per mode. It
seems unlikely that the mobile stations would get much
traction on 160 m. Consider starting with a mobile 80 m
setup, then take half of the effective antenna aperture and
double the losses. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Worse
of all, adding 160 m skews the playing field in favor of big
stations, at the expense of everyone else. The big stations
can go on any band, be S9+20 dB and command everyone’s
attention. They will do so on 160 m and run their scores up
even higher. Small stations cannot command attention, they
have to S&P people to work. Adding another band will
spread all of the participants out, making it harder for
small stations to find QSO partners, particularly on SSB.
In an ideal world, everyone would be on one band at the same
time so that it would be easy to find each other. The world
of propagation is not ideal, so we have to hunt more than
one band. Adding 160 m makes hunting less productive and
being loud more productive, decreasing the low scores while
increasing the high scores. It might instead be better to
level the field so that more stations can be competitive. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Regardless
of what the committee decides, I look forward to seeing
everyone in August. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">73,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Jim,
W8WTS<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div id="yiv1963773053">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
OhQP-mail mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OhQP-mail@ohqp.org">OhQP-mail@ohqp.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ohqp.org/mailman/listinfo/ohqp-mail_ohqp.org">http://mail.ohqp.org/mailman/listinfo/ohqp-mail_ohqp.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>