Hi Jay,
You may very well be right, but I'm hopeful they are paying attention to lists
like this one and read the 3830 comments as well. It is of course our
obligation to make them aware of the issues as well.
I agree that the new modes that WSJT-X offer us has had a great impact. I think
it gives many more people the opportunity to enjoy the VHF+ bands with perhaps
modest stations. It would be great if we could leverage this opportunity to
increase activity on the VHF+ bands, especially in light of what I recently
read about what happened in Israel. It scares me that one day all the great
VHF+ real estate that is available to us could be gone with a stroke of a pen.
73,
--Alex KR1ST
On Jan 20, 2021, 2:16 PM, at 2:16 PM, Jay RM <w9rm@calmesapartners.com> wrote:
>Alex, it's my opinion one of the reasons we even have to deal with this
>issue is that the 'movers and shakers' of the contest world are
>HFcentric. Except for one contest (10M test) almost every other HF
>contest
>is split mode - you work a phone weekend, then a CW weekend, with maybe
>a
>RTTY (read that as digital now) weekend added on. ARRL DX, CQWW, ARRL
>SS,
>NAQP, SPRINTS, you name it. I really don't think they understand the
>impact WSJT has had on VHF contesting - they never have to deal with it
>within any of their contests.
>
>-W9RM
>
>Keith J Morehouse
>Managing Partner
>Calmesa Partners G.P.
>Olathe, CO
>
>
>On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:02 PM <alex@kr1st.com> wrote:
>
>> I think the best approach is a separate contest for digital modes.
>It's
>> done on HF, and it's done in other countries. This is not terribly
>> difficult.
>>
>> The points per mode approach is doomed to fail I'm afraid. That may
>be a
>> solution if there would be an overall lack of activity. Then you can
>> make a contest more attractive by allowing to work the same station
>on a
>> different mode. However, in the areas where the complaints are the
>> loudest, there is no lack of activity. In fact, the level of activity
>is
>> sufficiently high on FT8 to warrant its own contest, and disallow non
>> burst type digital modes in the "regular" contest.
>>
>> By doing nothing, or by trying to somehow change the rules of the
>> current contest to make it more attractive to operate on other modes
>and
>> bands, I think you can be assured that the VHF contests will turn
>into
>> digital mode contests. I'm OK with that if that happens, but I'd
>rather
>> operate both a traditional _and_ a digital mode contest.
>>
>> Now an enterprising club could take advantage of the current
>situation
>> and use it as an opportunity to organize a digital mode contest
>within
>> the current contests...
>>
>> 73,
>> --Alex KR1ST
>>
>> On 2021-01-20 10:57, Sean Waite wrote:
>>
>> > Personally I don't think that's another contest, and that we need
>to
>> > find a
>> > way to co-exist inside the same contest. I'm not sure of the best
>way
>> > to do
>> > that. We have 3 contests in a year - we should try a different
>approach
>> > on
>> > each one (and yes, I realize there are weather and band conditions
>that
>> > change these contests) and see what approaches work well and which
>> > don't.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|