Hello to all interested in VHF Contesting.....
The topic of "assistance" has come up several times on various
reflectors in the past year or so. Let's see what we have now:
THE CQ WW VHF CONTEST
CQ has defined three kinds of assistance:
A)Passive Assistance--Passive Assistance means that a station
is allowed to look at the Internet resources. ALL stations are allowed
to use Passive Assistance
B)Active Assistance--Active Assistance means that you can post
to the various Internet reflectors. This is allowed for ALL stations
that are calling CQ using digital meteor scatter or digital EME.
Stations using this form of assistance can post their
Call, Frequency, and Sequence ONLY. No other posting is allowed.
C)Interactive assistance--Interactive Assistance is using
Internet resources to schedule contacts during the contest. This form
is NOT ALLOWED to any stations.
DISCUSSION OF THE CQ RULES:
The new CQ rules have removed the discrimination against the Single
Operator stations. It never made any sense to me at all that Multi
Operator stations were free to look at the Internet resources, but
Single Operator stations were not. When I made a post concerning this
discrimination, the ARRL apologists went into apoplexy. One actually
told me that, "Single Ops should not be able to do that stuff!" I was
astounded. Where do these ideas come from??
The CQ WW VHF contest is far and away the best VHF contest that we
have. The new rules for Active Assistance allow digital MS and digital
EME stations to "tell the world" where they are calling CQ. This means
that a lot more digital QSOs occur. It really makes it a lot more fun
and a lot more "rare" grids make it into the log. The CQ rules do not
allow SSB/CW stations to post themselves, so that is like the ARRL rules
for HF and VHF contesting.
THE ARRL VHF CONTESTS
For this discussion, I want to ignore the EME contest. The rules there
are so screwy that they defy reason--and the history of the rules
changes there is a very sordid affair. So, excepting the EME contest,
the ARRL contests do not permit any form of assistance. When this topic
came up in the past, there were a substantial number of folks that did
NOT want any new classes in the contest. NO NEW CLASSES was their cry.
At first, I did not agree with this point of view, but later I came to
see that adding an Assisted Class to VHF contesting was probably the
wrong way to go. It would further fragment the entries that we do have.
DISCUSSION OF THE ARRL RULES:
In HF contesting, the appears to be a never ending supply of stations to
work. You can point your beam just about anywhere and there will be
stations to contact. This is NOT true in VHF contesting. In my area,
for instance, there are only a relatively small number of stations that
can be worked--even with a very big station. Because of the "search
light" nature of VHF beams, it is quite possible to miss stations that
you could otherwise work, just because the two of you never got your
beams pointed at each other at the same time. So contacts that you
SHOULD have made, were NOT made. I don't know about you, but I want to
make EVERY contact that it is possible for me to work. The ARRL rules
seem to be constructed to minimize the number of contacts that you can
make, rather than maximizing them. The Single Op stations are at a
particular disadvantage, because of the discriminatory rules directed at
them.
The Internet is a fact of everyday life....it is a fact of Amateur Radio
and Amateur Radio contesting and it is not going away. The HF
contesters started the ball rolling with their Packet Spotting
networks. There was much howling and gnashing of teeth when that
happened. Finally, the HF world was forced to create Assisted Classes
for their contests. Now, we have packet spotting networks, APRS maps,
QSO spotting maps by band and by region, reflectors for meteor scatter,
EME and who knows what else. These resources don't make any QSOs....you
have to actually work the other station yourself, but they to help you
locate stations that you might be able to work. Unfortunately, there
are still folks that strongly oppose using such "non-Amateur Radio"
resources.
So, we do not have any Assisted Classes in the ARRL VHF contests and
many do not want any new classes. We can clean up most of the problems
without adding any new classes if we adopt rules identical to the CQ WW
VHF contest rules(or substantially similar rules). Some will ask,
"Well, why did the VUAC not accomplish this?" The VUAC began with
several successes--the new rover rules, the family station rule, and
other useful changes. Then the EME rules debacle occurred. After that,
the VUAC became a group that seemed to exist only to protect the status
quo. Nothing useful got done.
Can we do anything to make the situation better?? YES, we can. However,
the only way open to us now is to go through the Directors. Each VHFer
needs to send a letter to his/her Director(often) to let them know that
the VHF contesting rules need work. In that letter, you can outline the
CQ rules and ask that we move in that direction. Emphasize that the
rules for HF contesting are not a good fit for what we do and that there
is no reason why the VHF rules must track the HF rules. Have face to
face discussions with your Director on this topic whenever you can.
Keep plugging at this and progress will be made.
As usual, diatribes, flames, hate mail, etc. will go directly to the bit
bucket. They will not pass GO and will not collect $200. Thoughtful
replies are encouraged and appreciated....even if you don't agree.
73 Marshall K5QE
ASIDE: There are various tactics, within the rules, that would
ameliorate the worst of the ARRL's silly rules. That should be a topic
for further discussion.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|