Winding up the 2025
QRS International Flight Contest 

Eleven weeks and just over 130 QTCs since the launch,  it's all over!   Sincere thanks goes out to all who took part in the spirit IFC was intended,  for without entrants (albeit stating the obvious) there’d be no contest. 
 

And here's what you've all been waiting for:   the 'place-getters',  in reality the Winners who surpassed 100 points.  To avoid embarrassment, the points gap between 116 the next lower scorers is so big those entrants won't be listed, and neither will the even lower scorers who bailed out.  Nonetheless, all entrants will receive a suitably-annotated certificate in acknowledgement. 

It became clear early on that the significant numbers of early entrants was deceptive, because historically we know that few can see the many advantages such opportunities as IFC offer.  Most entrants were sending in QTCs only intermittently, eliminating any possibility of their ever reaching the notional threshold of 100 points. Then after making the same mistake over and over and despite being given wide-ranging hints how to jump-start themselves back on track, several bailed out entirely.  Hints cannot be too specific without unfairly discriminating against those who achieve top scores unaided, so lateral thinking in interpreting hints would have likely prevented so many bail outs.
 

Out of frustration I guess,  a couple of unsuccessful hintees  (if that's a real word),   became less than friendly and suggested traps had been deliberately set,  somehow the contest was rigged and trickery was going on to make them fail.    But for what purpose?   Nothing could be further from the truth, as the Winners' scores show.    Meanwhile the points-sucking conundrum that folks were facing seemed insurmountable, yet the solution was hidden in plain sight and the tool to solve it had already been provided.   It all came down to how the tool was used,  or if it was used at all.
 

Then rising out of the depressing murk came a bright light in the form of a very determined competitor who was not going to be beaten.  He put in the hard yards to unearth what was causing him, and the others in his position, so much grief.   It took a while before he tracked it down, but when he did he applied the new-found knowledge and got an immediate, gratifying elevation to 14 points for each flight.  Despite his early losses, dogged perseverance got him over the 'place-getter' finish line.  Lesson: any of those who bailed-out could have done exactly the same thing.

So what was going on?    Using this extract from my logs,  let's all play 'Spot the Problem'.

Look first at the two IATA codes,  then see how the airport of embarkation and its coordinates are the same as those of the destination airport?  How can that be possible?  Now consider the distance travelled, it shows they're not exactly located in the same city.      As QTCs arrived and I filled in the log sheets pre-configured for each competitor, the problem became instantly obvious.  I'm sure competitors never intended such duplication, but repeatedly earning only 8 out of a possible14 points was decimating the afflicted's scores, without considering further losses from various errors.

It might seem a bit dismal having only four competitors qualify as place-getters,  however their entries demonstrate the rules were clear and able to be followed.  Those high scores resulted solely from their personal dedication to the task,  especially so for our conundrum-cracking ‘Sherlock Holmes’ who successfully dragged himself back into contention after making heavy early losses  -  very well done that man!  
 

Finally,  not to be intimidated by the unpredictable 'god of propagation', Apollo, two place-getters thumbed their noses at using sound files and sent their QTCs live on 40 m HF  -  naked CW at its best.  The few errors encountered were quickly dealt with and only a smattering of perseverance was needed to succeed.
 

This kind of multi-tasking exercise is one way to gain experience in multiple disciplines simultaneously: comprehension; research; logical thinking; data handling and composition, in addition of course to CW competence  -  what’s not to like?      Those who adopted the aphorism ‘Who Dares Wins’, indeed won handsomely. 

Congratulations to our four intrepid winners.    Everyone will have learned things from IFC, including me, especially about what not to do next time.  In due course each entrant will receive a Certificate to hang on the shack wall in appreciation for either participating or achieving.  What's it called, brag-paper?

73  de  Stan