CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW this weekend

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW this weekend
From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: k9yc@arrl.net
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:45:26 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Knowing that those bands are open and viable is important information, and requires operator attention to discover (a spare radio tuned to the band with a suitable antenna), as well as the attention of the operator away from the band where he's operating. WRTC rules considered that assistance, and set up conditions for the teams that prevented their access to that information from third parties. I strongly concur with that concept.

FWIW -- a year or so ago, a determination was made that use of a code reader was assistance, because in SO2R operation, an operator could use a reader (like Skimmer) to show stations that could be easily picked off by QSYing to the station on Skimmer. In NAQP CW this weekend, a member of our club noted that he was put into M/2 by that ruling.

73, Jim K9YC

On 8/7/2017 4:26 AM, N4ZR wrote:
I missed both 15 and 10-meter openings this past weekend, for example - had I noticed on the scoreboard that othernearby stations were on these bands, this would not have happened, particularly given the band-by-band multiplier scheme in NAQP.To me, that meets the smell test as "assistance".


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>