CQWW RTTY 2015 Analysis

15 10 2015

Here’s the much anticipated attachment: CQWW RTTY 2015 analysis

A few days ago I sent an e-mail to the YCCC reflector requesting some CQWW RTTY 2015 logs for analysis and CQWW SSB planning.  I received 4 logs (K1SFA, K1SD, N1EN, N1WW), with a total of 6770 QSOs.
I’ve done this type of analysis before, using logs posted to the CQWW web page from serious Multi Op stations where they operated seriously for all 48 hours.  I think of these stations as beacons that are likely working most everything possible.  This gives a sense of what is possible to work – not necessarily from my station – but I have found it to be a helpful guide.
The information from the CQWW RTTY contest during the same year is more useful as the solar conditions will be similar to the CQWW SSB weekend (same year in solar cycle, and contests are 28 days (1 solar revolution) apart, resulting in the same part of the sun facing the earth and similar solar conditions).  The same caveats apply regarding station capabilities.  K1SFA was operated from K1TTT. Obviously what is workable on 20M with a 4 element beam at 180 feet is different than what’s workable on a 3 element tribander at 40 feet.  However, the information can still be useful.  Another factor to remember in this analysis is that the SNR required for a RTTY Decoder to decode is much less than is required for SSB. This obviously will effect workability of certain paths as well.
With only 4 logs received, there’s not as much data as I would have liked, but it still can provide some useful guidance for band planning in the upcoming CQWW SSB contest.
What’s attached:
I’ve attached a .pdf file that is a chart.  For those who have worked with Pivot Tables in Excel, that’s what this chart is.  The pivot table reflects all contacts from all 4 logs.
    • Across the top of the table are the CQ Zones.  I broke out the contacts this way because it is useful for determining with which part of the globe contacts were made.
    • Down the left side are columns for day, hour and band.
    • The far right column shows the total contacts made by band during the given day/hour.
    • The meat of the table is the number of contacts made on that day/hour/band to that zone.
What do all these numbers mean?
The numbers in the far right column are helpful to see which band(s) was/were the most productive for the stations analyzed.  Since the CQWW RTTY contest is 28 days (1 solar revolution) prior to the CQWW SSB contest, it provides some useful information about which bands may be most productive from YCCC territory during each hour of the contest.  This can help to guide band planning to maximize contacts during the CQWW SSB contest.
The meat of the table can help to identify when certain multipliers may be workable (again based on current propagation conditions because the contests are 28 days – 1 solar revolution – apart).  Again, this can help to guide band planning to maximize multipliers during the CQWW SSB contest.
I hope some find this information useful.  Thoughts and input are welcome.

73 de Al, KE1FO




Station Upgrades:Fall 2010

14 11 2010

I’ve been busy this fall doing a bunch of station upgrades.  It actually started last winter when I built the YCCC SO2R box project.  What fun.  Then, over the summer, the audio amp in the SO2R box died.  So after some sniffing around and e-mails I discovered that somehow I had a bad trace carrying +12v to the audio amplifier.  So I added a jumper to the bottom of the board to get +12v back to the audio amp, and viola!  Back in business.

So then it was on to other business, which was building the KK1L 2×6 switch and controller.  I started with the controller, which went together quickly and easily.  Then came the relay board, which went together fairly easily, except that the board has a HUGE ground plane, so soldering connections to ground takes a LOT of heat and patience.  Here’s pictures of the completed switch (mounted outside at my single point ground in a weatherproof NEMA box) and controller (mounted in a Radio Shack project box that has been taking up space in the shack for about 10 years!):

It’s very cool to have N1MM control my antennas automatically!  Now I just need to save up for an ALS-1300 amp or two.

Another major project was to install a 2 element phased array for 80M.  2 HF2V’s (with 20 radials each using a DX Engineering radial plate), and a Comtek PVS-80 hybrid phasing box.  It just got completed today.  It’s resonant a little higher than I’d like, so I plan to retune it a little lower in the band.  I’m seeing 10% dumped power at 3525, then about 1% dumped at 3650, and back up as I go higher in the band.  I was hoping for a better match in the CW and RTTY portions of the band, but it’s not bad for a first shot.  Below is a shot of my front yard where the new array lives.  Can you see it?  Click on the picture to see the whole album of shots of the new antenna.

The final project was to install a rotor on my 10/15M beam.  I got a used G-450 from a local ham, and used a Yaesu mast mount that’s been laying around for many years in my garage.  Now I can actually turn the antenna without running up 2 flights of stairs and out onto a balcony!

I’m hoping that these upgrades add a few points to my score in CQWW CW this year.  I really wish I could get up a 160M antenna before the contest, but I’m not confident that can happen.  That’ll be next years project!

See you in the pileups!

73 de Al, KE1FO





Long Overdue Update

11 04 2010

Hi everyone.  It’s bee way too long since I’ve updated the blog, but I’ve been very busy with shack projects the last month or so.  It all started with a computer death.  I was planning on operating ARRL RTTY Roundup seriously, but about a week before the contest, I started to get the shack ready.  The computer was not acting well.  USB ports seemed to be dying.  So I bought a USB board and slapped it in.  Then the onboard sound went south, so I slapped in an old sound card I had.  Then things started to get even wackier and I decided it was time for a new computer (the “old” shack computer was at least 6 years old).  Ended up ordering a refurbished Lenovo 9269-B9U from tigerdirect.com.  It didn’t arrive in time for ARRL RU, so I was off the air for that contest.

Then I decided that instead of re-connect all the current equipment to the old computer, I’d better get my 2nd Elecraft K3, build a YCCC SO2R box, get my Unified Microsystems BCD-10 band decoders working again for filter switching, etc.  Now that I’m not beholden to the propriatery WriteLog MultiKeyer, I’ve also made the switch to N1MM.  Now that’s all done, and here’s a picture of the “new” shack layout.

KE1FO Shack

Both radios have been placed to the right of the computer.  I’ll have to see how this works out for me.  Generally I’ve been more comfortable reaching to the right than the left, and when I had a rig on either side of the computer screen I always felt like I was watching a tennis match from too close when trying to operate both radios.  Now I need to move my head to go from the computer screen to the rigs, but not to see both rigs.  The plan is to run mainly on the furthest right radio (less “hand on the dial” time) and to S&P mainly on the left radio.  I was also compelled to but both radios on the same side because the YCCC SO2R box calls the radios “1” and “2”, so I don’t have to worry about left and right anymore!  But, just to be clear, “1” is on the left, and “2” is on the right.

I’m very proud of my 2 K3s, and my new YCCC SO2R box, so here’s another couple pictures of those items.

2x K3x

Oh yeah, that’s a nice Vibroplex Iambic Standard in front of the rig – Christmas present from my wife!

K3 & YCCC SO2R box

The next project that’s already on the workbench is a KK1L 2×6 switch and controller.  This will replace my homebrew 2×5 switch that I purchased from KV1W several years ago.  This new switch will be an upgrade in terms of safety and port to port isolation.  It will also allow for N1MM to control the antenna selection automatically (and independently of the filter selection – see the “band decoder output” section about half way down this page), so all I’ll have left to do (for now) is tune amps.  Controlling the filters indipendently of the antennas is important in my station because I’ve got multiple multiband antennas, but the filters are obviously monoband.  With the introduction of the new Ameritron ALS-1300, I may be making the move to an all automated station later this year (at least on the S&P station).

I plan to operate WPX CW seriously, so hope to hear you on then.

73 de Al, KE1FO





More CQWW Assisted vs. Unassisted ananysis

20 01 2010

Hello again everyone,

I’ve done some more looking at data, but I’m feeling a little limited by the data that is easily available.  I’m looking at the CQWW Records instead of results simply because they are readily available in a format I can import to Excel easily to massage the data.  I’d love to do this same kind of analysis with the overall results from several years of contests – that data just is not readily available to me.

With that limitation in mind, what I think I’m finding (with purely the data, no other information) is that serious ops who have really good skills can do better with assistance.  However, it seems that when an entrant is operating “more casually” they tend to operate in the assisted category, and thus have lower scores not because they are assisted, but rather because they are operating more casually.

For example, let’s look at VK5GN and D4B SSB records for SOAB and SOAB(A).  Both records were set within a couple of years of each other, with the larger score coming later in the solar cycle decline. The propigation conditions would have been similar, although I do concede that specific solar weather conditions (flares) are not take into consideration.  I’ve been looking for a source of historical Solar Flux, Sunsupt Number, Planateray A &K indices, but have not found anything comprehensive.  I have found the following site (http://www.solen.info/solar/old_reports/) but it only has data back to 2004.  Anybody know if a good source for historical Solar Weather data?

Category Call Score QSO’s Zones Countries Year Zone
A VK5GN 3,709,900 2928 127 333 99 30
AA VK5GN 1,844,180 1841 108 238 97 30
A D4B(4L5A) 20,433,438 8799 172 674 04 35
AA D4B(4L5A) 11,567,412 5845 152 586 02 35

In the example above, there is the same operator, operating the same station.  Now, within two years there could have been lots of station and/or operator improvements, however the score differences are pretty significant.

Here’s a few comparisons that go the other way:

Category Call Score QSO’s Zones Countries Year Zone
A VE3EJ 8,498,500 4603 164 575 02 4
AA VE3EJ(N5TJ) 11,080,260 5029 178 674 01 4
A S52AA 7,134,192 4378 151 473 92 15
AA OE4A(OE1EMS) 9,063,492 5118 164 640 04 15
A ER0WW(RL3FT) 5,517,720 5387 131 454 08 16
AA RU9WX 6,758,725 4091 125 536 07 16
A DU1/OH0XX 6,043,500 4341 138 336 94 27
AA KH2/N2NL 7,619,776 5156 151 385 99 27
A 5X1Z (SM7PKK) 4,900,518 3545 113 370 97 37
AA 5H3HK(JE3MAS) 5,786,933 4445 119 342 04 37

These all seem like pretty serious operations, from obviously competitive stations.  In these cases assistance seems to have made the difference.

Looking at the following 12 “close races” (which I defined as generally within 1meg points of each other) in the CQWW SSB records, the assisted scores came out on top in 5 cases, or 42% of the time.  Again, this analysis does not take into account other factors such as solar weather.

Category Call Score QSO’s Zones Countries Year Zone
A K6NA 3,642,240 2331 162 380 88 3
AA KI3V/7 2,299,142 1501 143 419 90 3
A VE3EJ 8,498,500 4603 164 575 02 4
AA VE3EJ(N5TJ) 11,080,260 5029 178 674 01 4
A VY2ZM 9,571,348 5854 134 494 07 5
AA KI1G 8,053,315 3768 168 617 01 5
A P40E (CT1BOH) 15,583,506 7816 166 533 99 9
AA 9Y4ZC(DL6FBL) 14,979,055 8114 137 500 03 9
A CE3FIP 5,682,040 3990 135 355 91 12
AA CE3BFZ 4,607,938 3574 128 330 04 12
A S52AA 7,134,192 4378 151 473 92 15
AA OE4A(OE1EMS) 9,063,492 5118 164 640 04 15
A ER0WW(RL3FT) 5,517,720 5387 131 454 08 16
AA RU9WX 6,758,725 4091 125 536 07 16
A EX9A(UA3DPX) 7,270,560 4945 134 460 04 17
AA RG9A(UA9AM) 6,511,351 3374 155 566 04 17
A DU1/OH0XX 6,043,500 4341 138 336 94 27
AA KH2/N2NL 7,619,776 5156 151 385 99 27
A D4B(4L5A) 20,433,438 8799 172 674 04 35
AA D4B(4L5A) 11,567,412 5845 152 586 02 35
A 5X1Z (SM7PKK) 4,900,518 3545 113 370 97 37
AA 5H3HK(JE3MAS) 5,786,933 4445 119 342 04 37
A TF1MM 1,949,184 2883 76 206 90 40
AA TF/N0HJZ 1,938,762 3454 73 249 05 40

My general “feeling” (meaning not directly data driven in any way) is that operators tend to select the assisted class when they are operating “more casually”.  However, when an operator is doing a full tilt operation, assistance does make a difference in the total possible multipliers AND overall score.

I also draw the opinion that operating skills, operator dedication and station design are much more important than assistance in achieving a good overall score.

In the end, I still dont’ think that SOAB entries (assited or not) will ever rival MM mult totals – and if they do, their q totals will have suffered significantly.  Records will continue to fall, maybe because of cheating (I hope not), or maybe because of better equipment and operators.  Either way, it’s all just a very interesting game.

73 de Al, KE1FO





SOSB vs. MM mults, CQWW SSB 2007

20 01 2010

Here’s a look at SOSB [not SOSB(A)] vs. MM mults for CQWW SSB 2007. The table shows the mult totals for world winners in MM, SOAB and each SOSB category.

Take a look at the percentage totals. The SOSB entries matched or beat the MM in mults, even though the SOSB entrants were NOT assisted, and the MM could (did?) use spotting assistance. The SOAB world winner was no match for the MM though in the mult (or q) race.

World 160 80 40 20 15 10
Winner category total mults total mults total mults total mults total mults total mults
TS6A MM 86 120 150 176 170 110
LU1HF SOSB10 0 0 0 0 0 130
ZX5J SOSB15 0 0 0 0 191 0
CN4P SOSB20 0 0 0 171 0 0
9Y4W SOSB40 0 0 147 0 0 0
4L4WW SOSB80 0 134 0 0 0 0
CN2R SOSB160 100 0 0 0 0 0
8P5A SOAB 52 103 133 153 127 93
Mults
MM vs. SOSB 16% 12% -2% -3% 12% 18%
MM vs. SOAB -40% -14% -11% -13% -25% -15%




CQWW CW 2009 Post Contest Writeup

1 12 2009

Wow, what a blast!  I love this contest.  Early this year, I replaced one of my TS-940s with an Elecraft K3.  I got it put together just before CQ WPX CW, and gave it a few hour test during that contest.  I was blown away by how good the receiver was.  I was able to work stations easily that I could not even hear on the ‘940.  With that thought lingering in my mind, I thought that maybe this is the year I could break 1 million points in CQWW (at least before log checking).  As I talked about in a previous blog post, I found an interesting tool online for analyzing previous years CQWW logs, and I put together a pretty ambitious operating plan.  Well, the new radio, and the planning all paid off.  Here’s the whole story.

Had a great Thanksgiving gathering (with 4 kids, we stay put and others come to us – this year only my Father-in-law, so it was a nice quiet holiday).  Friday I got up to the start of a migraine – not a good thing for having a relaxing day and being ready for the contest.  Took some Excedrine Migraine, and within an hour, I was feeling fine.  The Friday after Thanksgiving always involves going to cut our Christmas tree.  My wife wanted to go on Saturday or Sunday instead, because it was raining on Friday, and the weekend was supposed to be sunny.  I convinced her that getting the tree on Friday was the right thing to do, and we dragged all the kids out to slog through the muddy tree lot in the cold rain.  We quickly found our tree (encouraged by the cold rain), and headed home to have turkey sandwiches for late lunch/early dinner.  With all the required duties out-of-the-way, I headed to the shack about 6:30 to make sure things were all working right and see if I could find a frequency on 40M to run on.

Well, running on 40 was not in the cards, so I started off with some S&P on 40 with a whopping 24 q’s the first hour.  Wow, not what I had planned on. I was hoping for running 40M at 40-50q/hr.  No such luck.  But there was the hilite of tuning through the bands, and finding A25NW just starting to CQ on 40.  Got him with 1 call, THEN spotted him on packet.  That frequency was soon in chaos!  Second hour was not much better, with another 24qs in the log, S&P between 40 and 80.  Conditions seemed lousy.  Hours 3, 4 and 5 netted another 23 q’s, on 40 and 80.  I was pretty discouraged as I headed off to bed at 05z.

I got up again at 11z and had a little breakfast before heading to the shack, hopeful that conditions on the high bands would be better.  I was not completely disappointed.  Hour 11 (about 10 minutes of actual operating) had 6 q’s. almost all double mults.  ZM1A was worked on 40, KH6ZN on 80 – both nice catches for me.  Hour 12 had a few mults from 40 on the 2nd radio, and working S&P on 20, trying to decide if it was runable yet.

At 11:36z I settled in at 14039 and started a decent run.  I continued to work a few mults on the 2nd rig on 40. Hour 13 had 60qs and 14 had 51 – not too bad, but I was hoping the rate would be a little better.  Hour 15 and 16 were not good hours for me.  I tried to hit 15 too hard, and it was clearly not the place to be.  The band was not runable for me, and I ended up working a few mults, but the rate was terrible.  Could have kept running on 20 and gotten most of he same mults on the 2nd radio.  At the end of hour 16 I found a spot on 20 again around 14039 again, and hour 17 was another decent hour of running on 20 and 2nd radio q’s on 15 with a rate of 61.  After the discussion on the CQ-Contest reflector about “watching your dits” the call DH5HS caught my attention – and after a couple of fills I was pretty confident I had caught all the dits.

For some reason at the beginning of hour 18 I was compelled to leave a fairly good run to hunt mults on 20 and 15.  Hour 18 had a rate of 28 – 6 of those were the end of my run on 20 and were in the first 5 minutes of the hour.  Not sure what I was thinking but I spend the next 2 hours working packet spots (not all mults) on 20 and 15.  Took a break for lunch at the end of hour 19, and came back hoping that 40 would open to EU soon, and I’d have better luck running than Friday evening.

Apparently, running on 40 was not in the cards this year.  All of my afternoon and evening hours had rates under 30.  I did make two full complete passes on 40 (down then up), listening to every signal on the band, and working new ones.  But it was discouraging not to be able to get a run going at all.  I went to bed at 05z again, thinking that 1meg was not going to be in reach with the lackluster performance on the low bands.  After 29 hours of the contest (and about 22 of actual operating) I only had 440 q’s in the log.

Was up the next morning at 11z again, and hopeful things would be better.  By 12:26z I had settled in at 14041 and stayed put (only getting pushed off once and moving to 14038) for the next 3 hours with rates of 57, 55 and then 91!.  Now that’s what I was hoping for on Saturday.  While running I also picked off about 20 2nd radio qs/mults on 15.  That was a lot of fun!  So maybe 1 million is within reach – maybe – if 40 produces some this afternoon.  Hour 41 had 47 qs and then as things slowed down on 20 I had a 34 hour in hour 42.  Then it was another slow slog to the finish, with rates of 15, 22, 16, 20, 30 and 19 for the last 6 hours.

But, I did make it to 1 million, during the last half hour of the contest.  Once I made 1 million, I decided to just make a final sweep through 20 and see if I could work any of the qs to the south (LU, TI, ZW, etc.).  With only a few signals on the band, I opened the filter up wide, and tuned pretty quickly.  DP1POL was very loud and easy for a double mult, and R1ANC was also loud.  Two nice catches.  Then I heard a fairly weak signal – probably another LU q I thought.  So I listened hard.  It was a station CQing….9M….hmmm, what 9M prefix is in South America.  None I knew of.  CQ again, 9M2…hmmm, wait that’s Asia.  Then the signal came up and it definetly was 9M2 someting – cqing with no takers.  I dropped in my call and he came right back.  I confirmed the call as 9M2CAC in zone 28.  Wow!  What a catch.  And with the beam pointed south.  It must have been some type of long path greyline propagation, but he was in the log.

So I ended up just over 1 million points, and just under 1000qs.  Very nice – the best I’ve ever done in CQWW CW, so I was very happy.  I’m already looking foward to next year.

CQ Worldwide DX Contest, CW

Call: KE1FO
Operator(s): KE1FO
Station: KE1FO

Class: SOAB(A) HP
QTH: VT
Operating Time (hrs): 30
Radios: SO2R

Summary:
Band  QSOs  Zones  Countries
——————————
160:    0     0        0
80:   38    11       23
40:  228    27       91
20:  593    33      102
15:   92    20       62
10:    5     4        5
——————————
Total:  956    95      283  Total Score = 1,018,710

Club: Yankee Clipper Contest Club

2009 CQWW CW Rate Chart

2009 CQWW CW Rate Chart

Things that need fixing or upgrading

As always, I leave the contest with a list of things I wish were better, or need fixing.  I really like the getscores.org idea, but WriteLog does not post directly to getscores, and I could not get the new universal uploader script to work before the contest.  I ended up manually posting my score a couple of times on Sunday during the slow times, but I’d sure like the process to be automated.

I also need to get a new fan in my SB-220.  The SNR in the shack with that amp on is barely tolerable.

I’ve been thinking about putting up a 2 element array for 80M with a 2nd HF2V.  I think I’ll make this happen before next year – maybe even before ARRL DX if the weather cooperates.

I also wish I could do something better on 40M for an antenna.  I have a low dipole that slopes from about 45 feet at the northwestern end down to 25 feet at the southeastern end.  Works great for SS, and OK into EU, south and towards VK/ZL but has absolutely no signal to Asia.  I don’t really have supports to put up a 2nd dipole, so I’m thinking.  A half square would put a better signal into EU, and West, but I’d most likely lose the performance towards the south.  What to do….

I had planned to add a receiving loop above my tribander on the tower as shown in December 2008 QST Article by N6PE, but just didn’t get around to it.  I think I’ll make sure that happens before next year.

I had a 2nd K3 high on my list, but after this contest, I’m not so sure that’s such a high priority.  The ‘940 worked just fine for picking off mults most of the time, and if I felt like I really needed to DX and work somebody weak, I could always switch over to the K3.

I’ve got audio from the Right radio (the K3) bleeding into the Left radio audio (the ‘940).  I’ll have to trouble shoot this as it was very annoying at times, and the only way to stop it was to turn the K3 off completely.

I’d also love to work more on copying in two ears.  Or maybe not copying, but being able to tune out one ear to pay attention to the other.  Currently, when working SO2R, I have the headphones latched so that when radio 1 is cqing, I hear radio 2, and when radio 1 goes back to receive, I only hear radio 1. The few times I tried having the audio split this weekend, I went completely bonkers.  Maybe MorseRunner will add 2nd radio audio for those of us who need that practice.





Getscores.org Universal Score Uploader & Writelog Script

27 11 2009

So I wanted to try the new Universal Score Uploader for Getscores.org in CQWW this weekend. Friday morning I downloaded it and took a look at the sample script (which is for the IARU contest). Seemed simple enough to make the necessary modifications for the CQWW contest. Made the changes, and guess what – no joy. Tryed several different changes, with no success.

Finially after several hours of thinking (while going to cut down the christmas tree wtih the family) I had some more thoughts. What made the difference is adding a space before the band info for the bands 80-10. I realised that in the WriteLog summary page all the band names on the left are “right justifed”. To do that, there would need to be a space in front of each of the band names for 80M-10M to accomodate 160M. When I tried that – viola! It worked.

Here’s my script that is working (I think). The huge long line near the end makes all of the Q and Mult data print out on the Activity Log tab in the Uploader, so you can see exactly what’s been pulled and make sure things are working right. If you don’t want to see all that stuff, simply comment out that line.

Enjoy!

73 de Al, KE1FO

Now here’s the script (you should be able to simply cut and paste into the “Logging Script” tab in the Uploader – if that does not work, I’d be happy to e-mail you my .gus file – just drop me an e-mail):

Sub OnStartUpload()
dim wlObject
dim logFile
set wlObject = Nothing
On Error Resume Next
Set wlObject = CreateObject(“WLAPI.ScriptingBridge”)
On Error Goto 0
if wlObject is nothing then
Msgbox “Could not connect to WriteLog Scripting Bridge. The WLAPI.dll file must be installed on your system and Registered. To Register, enter ‘\Windows\system32\regsvr32 wlapi.dll’ from the Run box.”
exit sub
end if
‘VERY IMPORTANT! Set this logFile to the WriteLog Log File you will use during the contest.
logFile = “C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\WriteLog\contest\2009cqwwcw\ke1fo.wl”
if not wlObject.Initialize(logFile) then
Msgbox “Could Not initialize Writelog Automation interface to file ‘” & logfile & “‘. Check filename in script.”
exit sub
end if
‘Get the summary from Writelog
wlObject.GetSummary

‘—- Here is the “MEAT” of this script. Look at the Writelog BandSummary Window to see the Format
‘—- for the Summary. THIS SCRIPT IS SET UP FOR IARU HF. AJUST FOR ANY OTHER CONTEST.
Getscores.QSOCount(“160”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“160″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“80″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 80″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“40″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 40″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“20″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 20″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“15″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 15″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“10″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 10″,”QSO”)
Getscores.QSOCount(“ALL”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“Total”,”QSO”)
‘Getscores supports TWO multipler fields. Mult1 will be ZN (Zone) and Mult2 will be HQ (HQ Stna)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“160”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“160″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“80″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 80″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“40″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 40″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“20″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 20″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“15″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 15″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“10″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 10″,”ZN”)
Getscores.Mult1Count(“ALL”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“Total”,”ZN”)

Getscores.Mult2Count(“160”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“160″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“80″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 80″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“40″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 40″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“20″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 20″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“15″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 15″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“10″) = wlObject.SummaryValue(” 10″,”DX”)
Getscores.Mult2Count(“ALL”) = wlObject.SummaryValue(“Total”,”DX”)

Getscores.Score = wlObject.Score

‘IF YOU ARE PARANOID and Do not want to send your breakdown, uncomment this next line:
‘Getscores.IgnoreBreakdown = true
GetScores.SendScore
‘This next line prints all the data collected in the script and prepared for the upload to getscores.org – it is included for debugging purposes, and can be commented out if desired.
GetScores.LogMessage “160DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(“160″,”DX”) & ” 160ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(“160″,”ZN”) & ” 160Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(“160″,”QSO”) & ” 80DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 80″,”DX”) & ” 80ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 80″,”ZN”) & ” 80Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 80″,”QSO”) & ” 40DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 40″,”DX”) & ” 40ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 40″,”ZN”) & ” 40Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 40″,”QSO”) & ” 20DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 20″,”DX”) & ” 20ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 20″,”ZN”) & ” 20Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 20″,”QSO”) & ” 15DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 15″,”DX”) & ” 15ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 15″,”ZN”) & ” 15Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 15″,”QSO”) & ” 10DX-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 10″,”DX”) & ” 10ZN-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 10″,”ZN”) & ” 10Q-” & wlObject.summaryvalue(” 10″,”QSO”)
End Sub