George is spot on. I don't live in the NE corridor and I would appreciate
an assistance-free category to do radio contesting in the VHF and up bands.
Seems like during the last "discussion" of assistance we went around
pretty much the same way as people were lobbying CQ to allow assistance.
I pointed out that the only recourse for a lot of operators who did not
like assistance was to not support the CQ magazine who sponsored the
contest.
The rules were changed.
Did you get the August issue of CQ? Have you read the discussions
regarding CQ magazine lately?
The point here is that there is a large silent majority of operators
who like to find and then work stations without help. They are being heard
by the magazine now.
Radio is a lot of receiving with some transmitting. Assistance cuts
way down on the receive part of the equation because it will tell you who
and where. Sure you have to transmit to get the grid square and report and
make sure that the spot is the station you are hearing, but that is the fun
part, right?
I really hope that you are successful in getting the rules changed to
allow for all the assistance possible in radio contesting. Allow the
internet, telephones, chat rooms, whatever. That will make it easy for
people to make contacts. That appears to be important in enhancing your
fun while on the radio, so you should agitate vigorously for that. Maybe
that will get more people on the air. Maybe that will make everybody happy
to be transmitting a lot more than they are receiving.
But please leave a non-assisted category for guys like George and me.
Don't lump us in with a bunch of spoon fed people sitting in front of
radios. Don't denigrate the skills we have developed by knowing
propagation, different sounds of static, ability to effectively use the big
knob on the front of the radio by putting us in a category that says those
skills don't count.
We both should be able to have fun when we do radio. Just don't
relegate me, George and a bunch of Ops who abhor assistance into obscurity
while you pursue your goals. .
73 and I remain,
Lew W7EW
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 04:55:50PM -0500, Marshall-K5QE wrote:
> >
>
> > that C)To a very large extent, those that oppose "assistance" live in
> > the NE. LES, I hope I have stated the gist of your post correctly.
>
> I do not live in the NE and I would like to maintain a category that
> is assistance free.
>
> >
> > Jay-W9RM made a post wherein he talked about ANNOUNCEMENTS rather than
> > Assistance. I think that this is a genius idea. The concept of
> > "assistance" has become way too fuzzy and ill defined.
>
> Yes - this is a big problem when talking about this be it on HF or
> VHF. It has been clear to me for years that whenever this subject
> comes up there is much confusion over what is even being talked about.
>
>
> > different things to different folks. The Anti-Assistance folks have
> > taken advantage of this in various nefarious ways.
>
> I do not think that is the case. I also do not think that it is
> useful for you to generalize people in categories just because they do
> not agree with how you think the rules should be written. I think
> the world is more nuanced.
>
> I am sure you have already put me in the Anti-Assistance / old school
> / HF contester bucket and as a result you automatically discard
> anything that I have to say. And if that is the case then I doubt you
> will ever hear anything that I have to say on the subject.
>
> I did my first contest when I was still in high school in about 1979
> or 1978. These were HF contests - I did no have the money to buy any
> equipment for the VHF/UHF bands. I was exposed to VHF by a local that
> did some MS and EME and I think I might have a made a few contacts in
> a VHF contest at this time.
>
> I have been doing VHF contests since the mid 1980's. I have operated
> from the WB0DRL as well as doing a number of pre rover category rover
> efforts as WB5VZL here in Texas.
>
> When I helped build the W5KFT contest station I started doing VHF
> contests both single op and multi-op before building my own station in
> 2001 where I have done every June contest as both single op and
> multi-op since getting my station on the air. I really enjoy VHF
> contesting. I enjoy the challenge and I also enjoy the fact that I
> never know if the weekend will be dead or full of propagation. I
> enjoy the 300 qso weekends almost as much as the 2000 qso weekends.
>
> I think that I am more than some clueless HF contester.
>
> When I do HF contests I usually do not use any form of spotting
> assistance. In HF contests this comes in the form of DX clusters and
> Reverse Beacon Network (RBN) generated frequency and callsign
> information. Chat rooms are not much used on HF except for 160
> meters.
>
> In HF contests the above mentioned assistance is almost always allowed
> for multi-op stations. But not for Single op unassisted stations.
> There are categories for Single Op Assisted in most contests and
> these categories have become very popular. I sometimes enter these
> contests in the assisted category.
>
> Most rules on assisted for both multi-op and single op read
> something like this:
>
> From the CQ WW rules:
> http://cqww.com/rules.htm
>
> "2. QSO alerting assistance: The use of any technology or other source
> that provides call sign or multiplier identification along with
> frequency information to the operator. It includes, but is not limited
> to, use of DX cluster, packet, local or remote call sign and frequency
> decoding technology (e.g., CW Skimmer or Reverse Beacon Network), or
> operating arrangements involving other individuals."
>
> In addition these rules state that:
>
> "4. Self-spotting or asking to be spotted is not permitted."
>
> "8. All requests for contacts, responses to calls, and copying of call
> signs and contest exchanges must be accomplished during the contest
> period using the mode and frequencies of the contest."
>
> "9. Correction of logged call signs and exchanges after the contest by
> using any database, recordings, email or other methods of confirming
> QSOs is not allowed."
>
> And then from the FAQ on these rules:
> http://cqww.com/rules_faq.htm
>
> "
> How can I tell if I am Single Operator or Single Operator Assisted?
>
> The rules for Single Operator state "all operating and logging
> functions are performed by one person (the operator)." The CQ WW
> Contest has two classes of entry for stations with only one operator:
> Single Operator and Single Operator Assisted.
>
> You are Single Operator IF you (and only you) *locate AND identify*
> every call sign that you put in your log. Locate means to tune in each
> signal. Identify means to determine the call sign of the station you
> are working. Do not use any outside tools such as the DX Cluster or
> RBN network to locate new contacts.
>
> If you cannot say this, then you should enter the Single Operator
> Assisted category.
> "
>
> Another good resource for understanding what these terms mean is
> this FAQ by the ARRL:
>
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20-%20General/HF-FAQ.pdf
>
>
>
> > To way too many,
> > "assistance" means making real time schedules during the
> > contest....which I don't really see anything wrong with, but the legacy
> > HFers go into heart fibrillations whenever this is mentioned. By the
> > way, Announcements would make "real time scheduling" unnecessary.
>
> I have no problem making realtime schedules during the contest
> if you use the bands you are using in the contest. But if you do
> this by calling them on the phone, or sending an email, or sending
> them an instant message or on some vhf chat page - then I feel you
> are no longer operating in a *radio* contest. You are turning it
> into a contest to see who has the biggest Rolodex or has the most
> IM buddies or internet chat contest.
>
> >
> > I propose that we start talking about making ANNOUNCEMENTS in VHF
> > contesting. An ANNOUNCEMENT will have to be carefully defined to
> > prevent abuse. Although CQ does not mention announcements, it is clear
> > that their concept is that IF you are calling CQ on digital meteor
> > scatter(MS) or digital EME, you can announce Call, Frequency, and
> > Sequence ONLY on the Internet reflectors, packet clusters, whatever.
> > Such an announcement does not convey any QSO information, only that you
> > are calling CQ and where you are located. When you receive a call and
> > get a good decode, you will receive both his call and your call, so all
> > QSO information has passed over the radio path--thus satisfying Tilton's
> > Rule.
>
> In the HF world this would be called "self spotting". I can see why
> you would want to do it - it does make make making a contact much
> easier. And if you come back and tell me that VHF is different - I
> will tell you that VHF is not that much different. I can assure you
> that if this were allowed in HF contests we would all make many more
> contacts. Hard contacts on the high bands and the low bands. All of
> the marginal contacts that are hard even if you know when and where
> and who a station is. Long path on the low bands and scatter on the
> high bands. It is all just like doing a VHF contact. Signals are weak
> and you have to be beaming the right way to hear a station and it is
> very easy to miss such weak signals.
>
>
> > ASIDE1: Why allow Announcements for those modes and not for others??
> > Digital EME signals are quite often not detectable by ear.
>
> But this is unfair - why not allow it for all modes?
>
> > could "turn the dial" until the cows come home and you would never hear
> > a weak digital EME signal. You would tune right past it. However, I
> > work such signals all the time and others can as well, IF they can find
> > them. If I Announce "CQ K5QE 144.142MHz Second" then everyone knows
> > where I am. Just tune there and see if you can work me.
>
> How is this different then SSB or CW? I work plenty of stations that
> are VERY weak that if I knew they were there I could work or at least
> give it a go surfing the QSB and getting the beams dialed in. If you
> were to allow this for digital it should be allowed for all modes.
>
>
> > ASIDE2: Meteor scatter is not a weak signal mode, but signals are
> > essentially random in time.
>
> Just like those few minute peaks that we used all the time work some
> long path QSO on 160 meters.
>
>
> > Announcements be allowed in VHF contesting for digital MS and digital
> > EME.
>
> Why only digital?
>
> I do not like the idea of allowing self spotting - as you say it will
> be abused in some way - and it turns the radio contest into an
> internet assisted announcement contest. But if you do want to add
> these rules I hope that you do not only do it for digital modes.
> Is this a digital only contest? I dont think so. Those of us that
> have trained ourselves to copy weak signals in the noise with our ears
> should not be discriminated against. The idea of a contest is to test
> the operators and the stations. If I as a skilled operator can overcome
> the limitations of my station as compared to someone else should that
> not be rewarded?
>
> The fun part of me is in all contests is testing my operating skills
> as well as my station building skills. There are many things that go
> into producing winning contest scores and operating skill is a huge
> part of that for me.
>
> I would like to leave you with this thought - the rules for all
> contests do not need to be the same. If they were it would be boring.
> If the CQ contest allows these things then operate it. Or create a new
> contest that has these rules. In fact if you wanted to you could run
> your own contest with the rules you like during one of the ARRL vhf
> contests. You would not be able to submit your score for the ARRL
> event but if you think your ideas are really good perhaps everyone
> will enter your event instead. If nothing else you could start
> testing your ideas to see how they work in practice.
>
> I know that I have rambled on a bit - but anyone that is not
> clear on what assistance is perhaps a reading of the rules
> and FAQs from some contests will help define it a bit more.
>
> Or ask questions if you are unsure.
>
> --
> George Fremin III - K5TR
> geoiii@kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|