The Intensity of NAQP

Although I call myself a contester, there are times when I don't enjoy it. Most of what I dislike are intensity and the duration. NAQP (North American QSO Party) has intensity. At 10 hours of operating time it is at least brief. I can survive it even if I'm not always having fun. Despite that, it's a superb opportunity for honing one's contest skills.

The power limit of 100 watts tends to even out the competition. Modest stations can do well in these contests if the operator is skilled. The playing field is not truly level since antennas, location and propagation play large roles. The latter is somewhat balanced by propagation that favours western stations on the high bands and eastern stations on the low bands.

Despite the pressure I put on myself to do well, I dove in at the opening bell and did my best. As we'll see, I did better than in previous NAQP CW contests. That's promising.

This article might not be of interest if you're not a contester. That's okay. Even if no one cares, I benefit from writing the article since it helps me to think about what does and doesn't work, and then consider what I might do differently in future contests.

Team competition

The team competition isn't taken too seriously by most participants. You can tell just by scanning the list of irreverent team names. CCO (Contest Club Ontario) enters teams in NAQP according to member interest and participation. 

Despite not being a top-tier competitor, I do well enough that I am usually included in the CCO #1 team. That alone puts me in under pressure to do well since I get put on the same team as two WRTC gold medallists (VE3DZ and VE3EJ). I know them both and I'm sure they would have a good chuckle to hear that. The pressure comes from within, not from my fellow team members.

A little pressure to perform well is good. In past years the pressure of friendly competition made me a better runner and cyclist, whether it's a group sprint to the top of a mountain or not letting a friend pull ahead of me during a half marathon.

One peculiarity about the team competition in NAQP is that mixes assisted and non-assisted operators. Obviously teams with more assisted operators will score higher. Our team had at least two in the assisted class.

Practice

I don't practice SO2R very much, and 2BSIQ even less. You must do it in NAQP to have a competitive score. There are always stations to work so if you keep to a single "stream" you cannot be competitive. Of course, none of this matters for those in the contest just for fun. 

Many top contesters train with MorseRunner, RUFZ and other training aids leading up to major contests. I've tried offline training and hated it, so I no longer bother. Performing well is nice but it is not imperative. I get my practice on air. I know other (and better) contesters that do the same and for the same reasons. It's "real" radiosport.

I pick second tier contests in which I have no interest in placing well and that have enough activity to enable long runs and that have many stations and multipliers to hunt. For NAQP my practice took place in the RAC winter contest. I usually enter it just to hand out 10-point contacts to participants. This time I did it SO2R with a lot of 2BSIQ, unassisted and running 100 watts.

SO2R and 2BSIQ are more difficult in RAC, CQ WPX and other contests that include a serial number in the exchange. You cannot rely on the call history file for the contest. In contests like NAQP with fixed exchanges, all I do for most contacts is listen to ensure the name and state match the pre-filled data, and only type when they do not. It saves mental and physical energy when operating two radios. It's more stressful with serial numbers because you must listen and copy the unique exchange. That makes for good practice.

2BSIQ technique

For SO2R, I use N1MM+,  two keyboards and the SO2R Mini for controlling radio audio. It's what I'm use to but there are many alternatives. I am definitely a fan of two keyboards since I find it easier to mentally associate typing with the radio. When I need to focus on the audio of one radio, the "~" key in N1MM+ signals the SO2R Mini via its OTRSP interface. There are simpler and more complex (and expensive) products to manage receiver audio. 

N1MM+ has a software interlock so that you never transmit on both radios at the same time. That makes it easy to comply with the rules. For this contest I was powering two rigs from a single DC power supply. Since there is never a two transmitter load on the power supply you can get by with one 25 amp supply for both rigs

Synchronizing the QSOs on two radios can be difficult. The other operator may delay their transmission, send very fast or very slow, repeat the exchange, fail to respond the first time, send superfluous information (e.g. their call, again, or my call before the exchange), and so on. You must be prepared for surprises during every QSO.

There are many techniques for keeping the QSOs in sync. I am still learning but I know enough to do reasonably well. Sure, I flub a lot as well. It's important not to become embarrassed or despondent, and slink back to SO1R with head bowed. Keep at it and focus on getting back in sync.

Consider these alternative CQ messages (you can substitute "TEST" for "NA" in other contests):

1. VE3VN NA
2. NA VE3VN

Which is better? In some circles it is actually a point of contention. For SO2R, in my opinion, you ought to use the second. When the station you are in contact with on the other radio transmit longer than the CQ on the other radio it is a simple matter to tap F4 (or other function key depending on the logging software) to repeat your call to extend the CQ. You can't do that in the first case. 

I will also interrupt a CQ when I must transmit on the other radio, usually when I'm S & P on it, so that the other station doesn't think I've disappeared. Interrupting a CQ has a low cost while delaying an S & P transmission has a relatively high cost.

There are many more tricks that help to sync and re-sync the QSOs. Since this is not an article strictly about SO2R, and I'm not expert enough to be giving advice, I won't delve deeper. You'll figure out most of it on your own, eventually, if you keep at it. The better you get the less stressful it becomes. Your scores will increase and that will motivate you to stick with it. Always keep in mind that when you make SO2R flubs you are still providing a benefit for all participants.

Agility

In many contests, when you run you tend to do so for a long time. That is unusual in NAQP except for those with big signals from a rare multiplier. Most stations are hopping from band to band, so that when a run slows it is best to switch as well. You must both run and hunt, switch frequently and often hop from band to band. 

If you stick to running for too long, you will not work others that are running. The opposite is true for S & P. For every QSO, one of the stations is running and the other is hunting. It has to be that way. For those operating SO2R, at least one of the radios should be running. Dual S & P is more difficult than 2BSIQ since you often need to copy stations on both radios most of the time. That's a rare talent.

I am less agile than I ought to be. I stick with runs longer than I should, whether the rare drops or the rate remains high. The former case should be obviously true. The latter may be puzzling. By running for too long you miss activity and multipliers on other bands, and that will hurt your score no matter how good the run. Stop the run and hunt multipliers or work other bands, especially 10 and 15 meters, when they're hot. When you return to the band where you had been running. the rate will soon resume.

To be agile you must be attentive to propagation and hunt stations at high speed. If you are assisted, take advantage of that to rapidly work through the available multipliers and then other stations. But always do it while running on the other radio.

I was not as attentive to the agility practiced by others. When I had difficulty working a multiplier due to many callers, I would quickly move on and try to work them later. Often I delayed for too long and the station was no longer running -- they're practicing agility! That cost me multipliers. In many contests they stick around for longer, but not in NAQP.  

I have enough antennas that I don't rotate the yagis during the contest. I set them up before the contest begins, typically pointed south, southwest and west on the high bands. For the limited number of multipliers to the east I rely on backscatter or the yagis' minor lobes. On 80, the inverted vee is used for nearby stations and the vertical yagi to reach the Caribbean and west coast. On 160 meters I mostly receive on the southwest Beverage, and switch to other directions when necessary. All switching was done with mouse clicks using my station automation software.

High bands vs low bands

VE and W population is higher in the eastern half of the continent. That gives an advantage to western stations on the high bands and to eastern stations on the low bands. The high bands were so good this year that eastern stations delayed moving to 40 meters until well after sunset. In previous years there was lots of activity by late afternoon.

A common tactic of many of us in the east is to take off times during daylight. That leaves more time to work the low bands late into the evening. I took two 30 minute off times so that I could be active until midnight (0500Z). The rate was still high when I had to quit so I may have benefitted from more off time early in the contest.

The typical approach is to sweep up as many multipliers as possible on 10 and 15 meters, work as many other stations as we can and then move lower. 20 meters was my best band in this contest rather than 40 meters. Runs were ineffective on 10 and only intermittently on 15 meters, but 20 meters was very good until well into the evening. I failed to effectively use my time on 10 and 15 meters by trying to generate runs that never materialized. I should have hopped among the high bands more often and targetted multipliers.

The low bands were terrific as well, but only after stations moved down. It was pretty easy to work out to the west coast on 80 meters, and even on 40 meters well before their sunset. Later in the evening the same occurred on 160 meters. Had I been able to operate longer my multiplier count on 160 would been higher.

Multipliers vs QSOs

There are 60 to 70 multipliers available to work per band in any given NAQP contest. Not all states (50), provinces/territories (13) and other North American countries are active. That adds up to almost 400 multipliers that can be found across all 6 contest bands. Propagation limits your ability to reach the maximum due to skip zones or a low MUF on the high bands, and distance on the lowest bands.

The ratio of contacts to multipliers in NAQP is lower than in many other contests. In this contest my ratio was 4.8. It can be below 4 for those using assistance. The ratio is higher for the those with the highest score since they run out of multipliers to work. Look at the claimed scores at 3830 or the results of past contests.

A friend (who is a far better contester than I am) recently told me that he did an experiment in a previous NAQP. He operated 2BSIQ close to 100% of the contest. The number of contacts was higher than usual but his multipliers were lower. That may be due to stations in rare sections doing so well by running that they stick with it. A VE3 has to be more agile.

Getting fills

I had a peculiar problem in this contest that I haven't seen to the same extent in others. When I would ask for a fill, such as "name?", there was often silence or they'd send their call again. It took two or three tries to get the desired fill.

There was an even worse problem. In most cases when I copied a partial call, I would send the partial back one or two times. That usually worked well. Several experienced contesters would reply with only the part I was missing, whether the prefix or the suffix. That also worked well. The trouble came when I replied with the partial (or incorrect) call followed by my exchange. This is a common technique to save time and have both of us move on to the next QSO more quickly.

Few would correct an incorrect call. They either didn't care or didn't notice, though I am hoping it was the latter. Similarly, many did not provide a full call in response to a partial. As long as I sent my exchange they would reply with only their exchange. When I would repeat their call appended with a "?" or ask "CL?" or "CALL?" there would be silence or they'd repeat their name or the full exchange. In a few cases this went on several times. I don't understand it.

When all I received was silence after a few tries, I had to assume they'd left the frequency. I'd send "NIL" or nothing at all, and erase the incomplete QSO. I can understand why many contesters will not send their exchange until they've received the full correct call of the other station. I might have to start doing the same.

Holding a run frequency

I was surprised by how many times other stations would jump onto my run frequency and start CQ'ing. No "QRL?" or any announcement of their presence preceded a rapid succession of CQ's. I've never seen this happen so much in major contests like CQ WW. It happened to me more than a dozen times in this NAQP.

In about half the cases the station realized their error and vanished. The rest persisted. Having a fight over the frequency only wastes time so I take action. A small QSY of 50 to 100 Hz often solves the conflict. In other cases I find another run frequency, or I switch to S & P or try another band, depending on where I think I'll be most effective.

I note their call signs, and many are well known contesters. In several cases they would call me a few minutes later when they, too, quit running. It was funny in a way. All you can (or should) do is shrug your shoulders and move on. Don't let incidents like these derail you from your primary objective of scoring well.

Another way of putting it: "Contesting means never having to say you're sorry."

Errors, call history and spots

In December I contacted the keeper of the SCP (super check partial) database (W9KKN). I requested that "VE3UN" be deleted from SCP. It's a valid call but not one active in contests. After investigation he deleted it. While I can't stop others from confusing U and V, at least there will be a "?" next to the wrong call rather than a check mark. Busted calls get into SCP because multiple contesters make the same copying error.

It did no good in NAQP. My call was regularly busted as VE3UN. I suppose that it's all those dits. Not everyone regularly updates their copy of the SCP database or it be in the call history file they're using. It's also possible that they ignore or fail to notice the "?". Once they log the wrong call, it will show up as a valid option when they hear me on other bands. Assisted operators often believe spots and fail to listen. 

There is little more that I can do to avoid the inconvenience of being called by those I've already worked; I already send CW slower than most to help others. For the few that repeat my (incorrect) call before their exchange, I try to correct them. Even then many don't listen. I may be among the first to apply if we convince our regulator to issue contest friendly call signs as in done in many countries.

I am responsible for many of my own errors. I have yet to achieve an error rate below 1% when operating SO2R, and it is higher when also doing 2BSIQ. That isn't surprising. All I can do is practice more. I rely on call history to save unnecessary typing since that distracts me from successfully managing two QSOs. It is imperative to listen at all times since the call history may have no pre-fill. Names and locations are also frequently different. Hams move (and keep the same call sign in the US), alter their names slightly (e.g. ROBERT vs. ROB) or honour a recent silent key by using their name.

Too many don't listen and simply accept the pre-fill. I do listen and yet I still make mistakes. When uncertain or the station is weak, I will route that rig's audio to both ears for better copy, even when that means I miss critical info on the other rig. I can catch up and re-sync within 10 to 15 seconds. It's worth the effort. It isn't enough to have a high rate and multiplier count if you lose them after log checking and are docked an additional penalty.

Don't be lazy. Take the time to listen carefully and copy accurately. Your contest results will immediately improve. If you need CW practice to do it well, then put in the practice time. This applies to everyone, not only those operating SO2R.

How I did

Once I overcame the initial shock of diving into SO2R and 2BSIQ during the first few minutes of the contest, I settled down and did pretty well. I made mistakes, but I have enough experience to deal with them and get back on track.

I was unhappy with my rate over the first half of the contest and wondered whether I could equal previous scores. That changed as activity moved to the low bands. The rate increased and with the great conditions the multipliers filled the log. As usually happens, running provided the majority of the multipliers. Occasional spins of the VFO are used to hunt down the rest.

My raw results were 1234 contacts and 258 multipliers. That is a little over 100 contacts and 30 multipliers less than the typical top contester in this region in the same SOAB LP (unassisted) category. The best do even better than that.

Since no two years are the same with respect to propagation conditions and activity, the real improvement is seen in the rankings. I've definitely moved higher. Compared to the previous two years, my raw numbers are improved by 10% to 15%. That is mostly due to the increased time I spent doing 2BSIQ.

Looking forward

I don't know how much better I can do when I am unwilling to practice more to improve my ability with 2BSIQ. It would be enough to improve my accuracy and operating strategy. I have no ambition to climb to the top of the single op standings in NAQP or any other contest. 

Somewhere on that path there is a fuzzy boundary between the fun of challenging and improving myself, and aggravation. I won't cross that line.