Also note the interesting comments on the automation that the YT6 team
was able to implement.
Hi Gang
First, let me thank the WRTC 2006 organizers for a wonderful experience!
It was a superb venue and I think everyone appreciated the hard work,
the incredible PY hospitality and the addition of young teams, the YL
team and the Multi-Single/Multi National teams.
That's the good news - as it was really well done - and PY5EG and his
team deserve the thanks of all of us for their hard work - it showed!
Now the bad news - and I hesitate in writing this email - but someone
HAS TO and it might as well be me.
By now, nearly everyone attending and following WRTC 2006 from afar
knows that the YT6A team dropped from 3rd in the "claimed scores" to
11th when all was said and done - due to hundreds of uniques which
appeared in their log. This gave third place to Team N2NT/K1DG and
their win was roundly cheered when it was announced on Monday night.
Now, lest anyone misinterpret what I am about to relate next - please do
not jump to any conclusions without reflecting on the facts that are known:
1) Team YT6A had HUNDREDS of uniques in their log - no other team had
anything like that - other logs varied from a handful, to 20-30 - maybe
50 or so - so the YT6A log really stuck out like a sore thumb. Of the
many hundreds of logs that were sent in to the WRTC judging database, NO
ONE else worked the uniques that appeared in the YT6A log.
2) Did the judges have any other choice but to eliminate these qso's
from the YT6A log? Given the circumstances - NO! They had to remove them.
3) Did Team K1DG/N2NT deserve the 3rd place award - Given the
circumstances - YES!
4) What about Team YT6A? Did they deserve what happened to them? No -
not really because they did not do anything wrong - at least I can say
that given what is known....
Some facts to consider - and then the PROBLEM as I see it:
A) Team YT6A recorded the whole contest and the uniques that appeared in
their log WERE ON THE RECORDED FILE! In other words, they worked the
stations that were claimed in their log and who wouldn't work stations
that call them in a contest? I am sure everyone of us would respond to
callers who call in and work and log the stations. Why not?
B) The unique calls logged by Team YT6A all appeared on QRZ.com - they
were valid calls!
C) The uniques started appearing in their log after their first venture
to SSB in the contest - their first hours were on CW.
D) Some of the uniques were "country pride" - from YU stations probably
wanting to "help their team" - these numbered about 50 qso's.
E) The remaining hundreds of uniques "seem" to have been sent to them by
stations located in Europe - probably only a handful of stations were
involved in this - which means that every hour, on multiple bands, the
bogus calls were sent to "pad the YT6A log" - and, given about 20 hours
remaining in the contest - this had the result of producing hundreds of
uniques, legally worked by team YT6A - and as noted above, the calls
were valid appearing on QRZ.com
Are we getting the picture here? For the first time probably, outside
"skullduggery" tainted a wonderful competition - altering a medal
position - and raising a very serious question for future organizers of
the next WRTC's. It seems as if someone recognized the voice of YT6A or
his team-mate - and then decided to have some "fun with them" for the
rest of the WRTC operating period.
Is there any way of preventing this from happening again? (I'd like to
hear some opinions from others on this one - I have one idea - but I'll
save it for now....)
I spoke to Ranko for hours on Tuesday night - and he was pretty bummed
about all of this. He fully understands the decision of the judges -
but is devastated by the fact that this cost him a medal and about
several hours of operating time - spent working stations not even in the
contest.
And, when you consider the technical superiority of his station design,
it was easy to empathize with his position. Consider this:
The YT6A station design solved all of the operational issues presented
to all of us at WRTC - and was truly a marvel of automation and
efficiency. To my mind, it sets the bar really high for future teams
because of what it could do:
1) They could listen on the same antenna on another band - WITH NO
SPLASH WHATSOEVER. It was like the station B receiver was on another
planet!
2) They did not have to "put stations into a bandmap" to be worked when
possible by the Radio A operator. For this they had the slickest
interface system I have EVER SEEN.
The radio B operator merely had to step on his footswitch and Radio A
AUTOMATICALLY went to the desired frequency on the second VFO, it even
went to the OTHER MODE if the desired mult or station was on a different
mode being used by the RUN OP - and an optical sensor checked the AMP to
see if it was on the SAME BAND - or on a different band that the radio B
operator wanted to work. If on the same band, the amp remained engaged,
if the target station was on a DIFFERENT BAND, the amp was sent to
standby mode - and the B operator called the target station BAREFOOT for
three calls - after which a decision would be made to bring the amp
on-line to the new band.
I listened to an hour of the log file and almost every radio B qso that
I heard was made barefoot - rarely was the amp required to be switched.
As soon as the RADIO B qso was made, everything was AUTOMATICALLY
switched back to the original radio A settings - and the whole process
took about 1 second to make the call, another second to make the Q (in
terms of TRANSMIT time where the radio B op was actually interrupting
the A ops rate) - and then the B operator would go on tuning for the
next one.
Out of each page of QSO's - black ones were from the RUN op, blue qso's
were from the B operator and each page I saw had from 10-12 qso's
contributed by the second op. Listening to this all happen IN STEREO on
the recorded file, it was a wonder to observe as, at times, two qso's
were ALMOST occurring at the same time - but the thing was totally
interlocked - as the B op had total priority and took control as soon as
the A op's vox tripped out.
If you think this is pretty slick - then picture this. There's more!
On 40M CW, team YT6A had at least 25 notch filters, each about 5 khz
wide, which were tracked in synch with the VFO on radio A when on 40CW -
such that the correct notch filter was switched in automatically by
means of relays as the radio A VFO was tuned up and down the band.
Well - there was even more I saw - but I think it can safely be said
that the technical design and automation present in the YT6A design was
the slickest I ever saw - and will probably send all the rest of us
scrambling in preparation for the NEXT WRTC.
Given the effort made to come up with this kind of brilliant technical
work, and the obvious operator skill present to come in third in the
claimed results - I think I can relate to how these guys probably felt
when it was all over.......
Anyway - there is a problem here - someone or a handful of stations
"played all of us" in WRTC 2006 - and after thinking about this for a
few days, I'd like to see a dialogue of what (if anything) that can be
done to prevent something like this from ever happening at a WRTC again.
Thanks for reading.
73 JEFF
K1ZM at aol.com
_______________________________________________
WRTC2006 mailing list
WRTC2006 at wrtc2006.com
http://list.wrtc2006.com/mailman/listinfo/wrtc2006
|