I don't even post my grid when I post my contest results until the contest
log deadline is past.
73, Zack W9SZ
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Todd <wd0t@mncomm.com> wrote:
> George,
>
> Great post, i thought i was loosing mind reading this stuff about
> announcements etc., where you post your grid, call , etc are you kidding
> me!!?? Where is the operating ability and skill to pull that out of a
> contact!
>
> I uses to send my grid during a VHF CQ but i dont so that anymore either
> just because it takes away skill of trying to work and copy stations.
>
> I am like you lets operate radio and work contacts the right way
>
> 73 Todd WD0T
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 20, 2013, at 4:14 AM, vhfcontesting-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
> > Send VHFcontesting mailing list submissions to
> > vhfcontesting@contesting.com
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > vhfcontesting-request@contesting.com
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > vhfcontesting-owner@contesting.com
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of VHFcontesting digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: Announcements and VHF contesting.... (Keith Morehouse)
> > 2. Announcements and VHF contesting.... (Marshall-K5QE)
> > 3. Re: Announcements and VHF contesting.... (George Fremin III)
> > 4. Re: Announcements and VHF contesting.... (Lew Sayre)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 17:38:52 -0500
> > From: Keith Morehouse <w9rm@calmesapartners.com>
> > To: Marshall-K5QE <k5qe@k5qe.com>
> > Cc: VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
> > Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Announcements and VHF contesting....
> > Message-ID:
> > <CACCAnzUgD6tfNeTsSLLts9AhQSw4w-_ZLpfMFbDaaFWxHQPkqQ@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > Allowing such a thing for digital operation is fine and in line with
> > what CQ allows in their VHF test. Personally, I would take this one
> > step FURTHER and allow ANNOUNCEMENTS for any band or mode at any time,
> > for any class of entry. For example:
> >
> > (announce) W9RM DM58 144.210 CQ CW EAST
> >
> > The idea is to get the activity level up and for the vast number of
> > non-serious contesters, knowing someone was there and trying to work
> > guys could do it. Sure, in the beginning, the chats might be clogged
> > to overflow with these messages, but, in the long term, I believe only
> > those who are successful in working people after one of these
> > ANNONCEMENTS would persist in doing it.
> >
> > Jay W9RM
> >
> >
> > Keith J Morehouse
> > Managing Partner
> > Calmesa Partners G.P.
> > Montrose, CO
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Marshall-K5QE <k5qe@k5qe.com> wrote:
> >> Hello to everyone interested in the "Assistance" concept for VHF
> >> contesting....
> >>
> >> My last post was made at 2AM, so I am not sure how coherent it was.
> >> Hopefully, not too bad.....
> >>
> >> Les-N1LF made an observation recently that was, I believe, terribly
> >> important. He observed that A)All VHF contesting is local, B)Those in
> the
> >> famous "Golden Corridor" have a tremendous advantage over the rest of
> us who
> >> live in the sticks(the high population density of hams), and 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.
> >>
> >> 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. It means
> different
> >> things to different folks. The Anti-Assistance folks have taken
> advantage
> >> of this in various nefarious ways. 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 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.
> >>
> >> I propose that an Announcement should be defined to be your Call,
> Frequency,
> >> and Sequence ONLY. The idea of posting Call, Frequency, and Sequence
> ONLY
> >> was first brought forward by a very well known Pacific Northwest
> VHFer(and a
> >> couple of others as I recall), so it is not my idea, but it is an
> incredibly
> >> good idea. If we follow the CQ idea, an Announcement would be permitted
> only
> >> for stations calling CQ on digital MS or digital EME.
> >>
> >> ASIDE1: Why allow Announcements for those modes and not for others??
> >> Digital EME signals are quite often not detectable by ear. So, you
> 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. I want to stress this--An
> >> Announcement does not WORK anyone, you have to actually do that
> yourself.
> >> Only then can you put them in the log. As Jay-W9RM has so carefully
> pointed
> >> out, if someone intent on cheating were to enter me into his log just
> based
> >> on my Announcement, when the log checking process was applied, the
> bogus QSO
> >> would be removed from his log and he would be penalized points. It
> seems to
> >> me that no one is stupid enough to do this.....but I am probably wrong
> on
> >> that.
> >>
> >> ASIDE2: Meteor scatter is not a weak signal mode, but signals are
> >> essentially random in time. If you carefully tune a given frequency,
> say
> >> 50.265MHz, you most likely will not hear anything. After you tune away
> >> trying to find a signal somewhere else, a large burn may occur. What
> this
> >> means is that tuning for MS signals is essentially a waste of
> time....you
> >> will very likely never hear anything. A simple Announcement solves this
> >> problem very nicely. Now stations all around the country know where I
> am
> >> calling CQ. IF they are within MS range, they can try to call me and
> >> hopefully a QSO will result. This system is FAR superior to the system
> that
> >> we now use(everyone calls on 50.260MHz with an offset frequency where
> the
> >> QSO is supposed to actually take place). Seasoned MS ops know the
> current
> >> system and for them it works OK. Newer ops really don't understand
> what is
> >> going on and contacts with them are frequently lost because they don't
> >> understand the idea of moving to make a QSO. An Announcement would tell
> >> everyone where I am calling CQ with no need for the "bait and switch"
> method
> >> we now have.
> >>
> >> I believe that we should all contact our Director and request that
> >> Announcements be allowed in VHF contesting for digital MS and digital
> EME.
> >> This is not going to rend the fabric of VHF contesting, but it sure will
> >> make it a lot more fun as dozens of "rare" grids will now find their way
> >> into the logs. I don't think that this is too much of a stretch for the
> >> folks at the League. If it is, then we are DOOMED as my son likes to
> say.
> >>
> >> I forwarded my previous post to my Director, and I will do the same with
> >> this one. We need to try to get the Directors to understand what needs
> to
> >> be done....
> >>
> >> 73 Marshall K5QE
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> VHFcontesting mailing list
> >> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 19:26:45 -0500
> > From: Marshall-K5QE <k5qe@k5qe.com>
> > To: VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
> > Subject: [VHFcontesting] Announcements and VHF contesting....
> > Message-ID: <523B9645.8070703@k5qe.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >
> > Hello everyone....A first possibility here is to just make a special
> > "exemption" for such a rover post. It must be emphasized that ALL the
> > contact information must still be exchanged via the radio path. This
> > happens with rovers now. When I work a rover in EL18 on 2M and move him
> > to 222, then I KNOW that he is in EL18, but to make a complete QSO, I
> > must hear the EL18 from him on 222. I think that 99% of all operators
> > adhere to this method.
> >
> > Failing that, this objection is easily worked around. Just post W9FZ/R
> > 144.225 31.2N 93.5W......WinGrid will immediately tell you that Bruce is
> > in EM31 without posting any piece of the QSO information. Of course, by
> > convention, we could omit the N and the W. Unfortunately, the post has
> > gotten much more complicated just to avoid saying the Grid name.
> >
> > Such an Announcement by rovers WILL increase the number of rover QSOs
> > made.....and I think that is a good thing. As I posted before, we need
> > a careful definition of what an Announcement is. If this suggestion is
> > implemented, then a Rover Announcement would have a different form from
> > a fixed station Announcement......nothing wrong with that.
> >
> > I have posted ideas similar to this in the past and I think it is a very
> > good idea. The main complaint that I have heard from rovers is that
> > they arrive at some god-forsaken place, trying to give out some rare
> > grid, but cannot attract the attention of anyone to work. It is highly
> > frustrating....the rover does not work anyone(or very few) and you don't
> > work him either.
> >
> > I believe that this proposal should be moved forward....and on the Fast
> > Track.
> >
> > 73 Marshall K5QE
> >
> >
> > On 9/19/2013 5:47 PM, Jack W6NF wrote:
> >> On 9/19/2013 5:35 PM, Todd Brandenburg wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That ROVER operators also be allowed to post announcements, stating
> >>> call, current grid (the one you just crossed into), and the freq
> >>> you're monitoring. Add sequence if you're operating the digital
> >>> modes, omit if not. i.e. for Bruce W9FZ, it would simply be "W9FZ/r
> >>> now in EM04xx, listening 144.225". No need for extra info- bands one
> >>> is operating, power, antennas, etc. That can be posted before the
> >>> contest, on this reflector and elsewhere.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> The problem is the inclusion of the grid in the announcement provides
> >> the single piece of information that constitutes the contest exchange
> >> and is not permissible.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:20:09 -0700
> > From: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>
> > To: Marshall-K5QE <k5qe@k5qe.com>
> > Cc: VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
> > Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Announcements and VHF contesting....
> > Message-ID: <20130920012007.GA6322@kkn.net>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 02:14:01 -0700
> > From: Lew Sayre <lew@dsl-only.net>
> > Cc: VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
> > Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Announcements and VHF contesting....
> > Message-ID:
> > <CA+6hS7iCA7w7_Y_KY81X+cCTAPU5iK2d_GGF5jwwJZ7rT3haRA@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > 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
> >>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of VHFcontesting Digest, Vol 129, Issue 26
> > **********************************************
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|