Unnecessary? Really?
The rule is in place to assure that two signals cannot occur simultaneously
on a band in compliance with the rules. Dueling CQ's is already forbidden in
the rules for many reasons.
It is quite apparent in the recent CQWW and RDXS results with
disqualifications that many stations are not managing one signal on a band
properly.
If a station is going to enter such a category and use more than one radio
per band, they should use proper technology to manage it properly.
I see this as completely appropriate and given the recent disqualifications,
obviously necessary.
73,
Bob W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Juha Rantanen
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 12:24 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Multi-op rule change in CQWW
CQWW CC has created a totally unnecessary rule change for multi-ops in CQWW:
12. When two or more transmitters are present on a band, either a
software or hardware device MUST be used to prevent more than one
signal at any one time;&xnbsp; interlocking two or more transmitters
on a band with alternating CQs (soliciting contacts) is not allowed.
Those who have the capabilities of creating such a station that allows
alternate CQ's on the same band and the skills to use it efficiently
should be allowed to do it. I wonder what is behind this rule again?
We have seen past few days that the signal interlocking rule can be
enforced is one wants to it as RDXC CC has done.
Juha OH6XX
"CQWW - Stone Age contesting!"
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|