I admit to having been (and still am in some respects) one of those 'HF
contesters" Marshall loves to abuse. I also understand the push to keep a
"pure" single op category where it's man against man with no machine
assistance. I think that is fine for HF contests and would not support any
attempt to allow machine assistance there.
I also do NOT support unlimited use of spotting nets or the ability to self
spot for single operators in VHF contests. The key word in that last
sentence is UNLIMITED. What I do support (and urge the ARRL to implement)
is the LIMITED ability to self spot when a single operator is engaged in
activities that are, by nature, not readily detectable and not subject to
normal terrestrial propagation. Even then, I only support self spotting
that is a basic indicator of such activity.
CQ Magazines VHF contest in July has exactly the kind of rule I support. A
limited ability to self spot when one is engaged in digital meteor scatter
or digital EME (i.e WSJT). No QSO information is being exchanged and no
"conversation" is taking place that could invalidate the contact. It is
simply a "Hello, I am on this frequency attempting to work stations using
very difficult and random methods. Please listen for me."
I might also support this type of self spotting for Rover stations if the
actual format of such a spot was carefully defined, controlled and enforced.
Jay W9RM
Keith J Morehouse
Managing Partner
Calmesa Partners G.P.
Montrose, CO
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:43 AM, John D'Ausilio <jdausilio@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> Honestly I can't see any reason why everyone shouldn't be allowed to
> self-spot in VHF and up tests .. we're looking to make weak signal
> contacts over hard-to-predict paths with rapidly changing conditions,
> why wouldn't we want to do everything we can to maximize the chance of
> success?
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|