Subj: Re: [VHFcontesting] Digimodes in VHF/UHF contests? Why not?
In summary, there is debate among the VHF community about the use of
Non-traditional modes including digital mades, etc.
So the question for the ARRL is what modes are allowed or not allowed?
It seems to be the consensus that HSCW and WSJT are valid modes.
But there may be some operators that while they are on the computer, find it
too easy to get an "Internet boost."
'Operators who are experienced in HSMS techniques, either HSCW or
more recently with WSJT, generally know the rules, follow them
carefully, and have been helpfully advising newcomers "don't chat
while we run, it will invalidate the QSO", or similar words.'
Below are copies of some emails discussing the situation....
In a message dated 9/1/01 5:14:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jomara@erols.com
writes:
<< Subj: WSJT
To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: 9/1/01 5:14:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: jomara@erols.com (Jack O'Mara)
Sender: owner-vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu
To: hsms@qth.net, meteor-scatter@qth.net, vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu
The W4IY contest group are thinking of trying the WSJT mode
in the September contest. The thought was to use 144.145
instead of tying up the calling freq. The timing would be
0700Z to 1100Z on Sunday Sept. 9th. We would add our grid
square between the two reports after our call.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this pro or con or other
suggestions. We would like to hear them.
73
Jack W4AD
>>
Subj: Re: [VHFcontesting] Sept Contest
To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: 9/2/01 7:32:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: k1whs@worldpath.net (DAVID C. OLEAN)
Sender: vhfcontesting-admin@contesting.com
Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:k1whs@worldpath.net";>k1whs@worldpath.net</A>
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com (VHF Contest Reflector)
Hi Dave,
The genesis for my original post was the WSJT mode, which apparently, is
a step up from the normal high speed meteor scatter. Essentially all of the
detection is done by the computer. The operator sits there and reads the copy.
I guess it is like rtty in that respect. It is very effective, but I think
about the League vs Peter Laakman, WB6IOM and G3LTF (I think) and their non
allowed 1296 eme QSO. (In the late 60s or early 70's) They did much more
receiving than a WSJT operator. I was just curious about what folks thought.
Hey, I'm game to try anything if it is legal and proper. I will get to
playing with WSJT soon too. but I would agree that, in pursuing all the grids
thru "automated" modes such as WSJT, the more traditional microphone or CW
contacts would suffer. I have shied away from HSMS because the operator does
not have to copy in "real time". Heck, that eliminates the adrenaline flow
when that big meteor blows by and you fall out of the chair!
When I was a kid, my first 144 signal heard was a weak and whispery am
signal. I was holding onto a limb up in the apple tree in my yard. My other
arm was holding onto a small super regen transceiver I had built and finally
got working. Straining to hear that signal got me going in ham radio. I guess
I love the medium that is between the two antennas at either end of the
circuit. I love the mystery. I love to hear the fading. I like those hollow
sounds, and always wonder about how it sounds that way sometimes. This is the
reason ham radio attracts me. I, as you, worry that such days may be numbered!
Soon we may all be watching computer screens and disconnected from the medium
that we love. Gosh, progress is a two edged sword!
I would opt for a separate contest for the automated modes. Of course, the
downside is that there are too many contests now! Maybe there is another
answer. I just hate to see activity fall any more than it has now!
Dave Olean K1WHS
Dave Pascoe KM3T wrote:
>
>
> > At a basic level - having the human ear used for detection of the
> > signals makes sense. The day might be coming where technology could
> > replace the human ear with enough performance to make the human
> > detection method non competitive... I for one would not welcome that
> > day as I think it would remove most of the fun and make the results
> > less dependent on operator skill, but rather how well you can program
> > your DSP. I feel the basic thing that makes ham radio interesting
> > compared to just sending e-mail is putting on your headphones and
> > listening.
>
> I'm familiar with HSCW and WSJT but have personally not operated either
> mode. I look forward to trying both, from a technical and fun
> perspective. But, for contesting, I fall in the camp who believes using
> the human ear for detection ought to be the way to go. I know that there
> will be some doom-and-gloomers who will come out and say that the only way
> to get new people interested in doing VHF contesting will be to allow
> these modes. Well, that may be true, but it's pretty unlikely. There are
> plenty of ways to recruit without having to depend overly much on whizbang
> technology.
>
> I certainly could see a separate, short contest (like a HSCW or WSJT
> Sprint) which could be fun and allow interested folks to compete. But I
> would not want to see the existing VHF contests changed. One of the
> problems I could see is a substantial shift to these modes, caused by the
> natural competitive desire to work more grids, which could take activity
> away from the more traditional modes, making those not inclined to use the
> new modes lose interest due to decling activity. We do have to do
> something to increase contest activity, but I'm not sure these new modes
> is the best route to that goal.
>
> 73,
> Dave KM3T
>____________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
Subj: Re: [VHFcontesting] Digimodes in VHF/UHF contests? Why not?
To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: 9/3/01 1:22:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: joe@puppsr13.princeton.edu (Joe Taylor)
Sender: vhfcontesting-admin@contesting.com
To: k1whs@worldpath.net
CC: vhfcontesting@contesting.com (VHF Contest Reflector)
Dave --
Many thanks for your follow-up message. I did not take any of
your original comments as being unreasonable; it is, indeed,
interesting to know what the ARRL might think about the use of a
new mode in League-sponsored VHF contests. And it's useful to
have some discussion of it on reflectors such as this one, too --
since to a very considerable extent the "League opinion" is and
should be a reflection of the views of us all!
Rule 3.10 in the "General Rules for All ARRL Contests" reads as
follows:
"The use of non-Amateur Radio means of communication (for
example, Internet or telephone) to solicit a contact (or
contacts) during the contest period is not permitted."
To me, that means you must make your skeds before the contest
starts, or perhaps via ham radio on another band during the
contest. Seems clear enough.
Rule 2.1.3 in "General Rules for ARRL Contests on Bands above 50
MHz" states that for Single Operator stations, "Use of spotting
assistance or nets (operating arrangements involving other
individuals, DX-alerting nets, packet, etc.) is not permitted."
Once again: whatever skeds, etc., you want to make, using the
internet, do it before the contest -- and disconnect yourself
from the net when the contest begins!
As for so-called QSOs in which *any* of the required information
for a QSO is exchanged or hinted at on a chat page, etc., during
the contact, forget it. That's no QSO!
Operators who are experienced in HSMS techniques, either HSCW or
more recently with WSJT, generally know the rules, follow them
carefully, and have been helpfully advising newcomers "don't chat
while we run, it will invalidate the QSO", or similar words.
As for your shack with few amenities: with the above rules in
mind, WSJT should work just fine for you during contests. We've
done HSCW from the PackRats June VHF QSO Party mountaintop
location, and I expect we'll use WSJT next June. Of course we
have no internet there. Without really trying very hard, we've
worked 4-5 extra 2m grids that way in each of the last couple of
years, using the wee hours of the morning when other activity is
minimal. With WSJT, that number could easily be doubled, or
tripled, because QSOs can often be completed in 15 minutes
instead of taking half an hour or more.
Finally, about the possibillity of "the whole bottom of the 144
band being filled with blips and burps and see[ing] ssb and cw
activity drop even more at the same time." That would not be
good, I agree. The Europeans, with their higher population
density and higher levels of VHF activity, have I believe more or
less decided on a band plan that would put WSJT use up around
144.370. This does not seem unreasonable to me for North
America, as well, although heavy use of 144.100 through 144.150
for WSJT over the past couple of months has caused almost no
problems, as far as I am aware. That, of course, has been under
non-contest conditions.
See you on the air next weekend!
-- 73, Joe, K1JT
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Jack O'Mara" <jomara@erols.com>
Subject: WSJT
To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 20:10:52 -0400
Size: 2190
Url:
http://dayton.akorn.net/pipermail/vhfcontesting/attachments/20010903/fec0856e/attachment.eml
|