CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway?

To: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway?
From: steve.root@culligan4water.com
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:51:55 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
If you have more than one signal present on one band, the FCC considers at one 
of them to be spurious and therefore illegal. That's a bigger deal than a 
contest rule.

Now how many of you have heard Multi-singles in SS Phone giving an exchange, 
while another voice in the background was clearlly CQ? There's no microsecond 
switching going on there, that's an actual M/2. This happened a couple of years 
ago with a club station in my area. The operators in this case were unaware 
that they were doing anything wrong and have since learned the error of their 
ways, but this example does illustrate how easy it is for a "M/S" to actually 
operate like a M/2....if there isn't a 10 minute rule.

73 Steve K0SR
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Thompson K5ZD [mailto:k5zd@charter.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2009 12:25 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway?

We all like to talk about things being in the "spirit of the rule." However, 
the 'spirit' is often open to interpretation by each participant! At the top 
tier multi-multi and multi-single efforts, there are often multiple stations on 
one band. This allows a second station to make QSOs while the main station 
continues to run. Most people who do this a very careful to prevent multiple 
transmitters being on the same band at the same time. However, it does start to 
push the credibility of being multi "single". How would the multi-single rule 
be written to prevent this? Think about it before you answer. Its not as easy 
as it seems! Randy, K5ZD > -----Original Message----- > From: 
cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] 
On Behalf Of Ron > Notarius W3WN > Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 3:15 PM > To: 
cq-contest@contesting.com > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule 
anyway? > > > > Sorry Larry, but the fact remains that several Multi-Multi
  > stations in different contests got caught trying to get > around the 
spirit, if not the letter, of the Multi-Single category. > > I agree in 
principle with the concept that any M/S effort > should have ONE and ONLY ONE 
transceiver operational (ie on > the air) at a single time. The problem is in 
defining how > long is "a single time." The fact remains that it has been > 
PROVEN that some teams interpret this as meaning "at any > given moment" so 
that while Transceiver "A" is receiving, > Transceiver "B" is available to 
transmit, and vice versa. > That is certainly not within the spirit of the M/S 
category. > > That is why things like the 10 minute rule were put in place, > 
and why transmitter lock-outs like the Octopus (which I > recall was used in 
ARRL Field Day and/or ARRL Sweepstakes). > > It's not a case of someone 
deciding in advance they couldn't > trust a team effort. It's a case of having 
discovered after > the fact that at least a few teams were, if not > untrustw
 orthy, then "creative" -- but bent the rules too far. > > Now: Rather than cry 
about how unfair the 10 minute rule > is... keeping in mind the principle that 
it's supposed to > stand for... how would you rewrite the general M/S category 
> to ensure that only a single rig is actually on the air over > a given period 
of humanly measureable and noticeable time, > and not computer managed into 
micro-sections? > > 73 > > -----Original Message----- > From: 
cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] 
On Behalf Of RW4WZ > Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 1:32 AM > To: 
cq-contest@contesting.com > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule 
anyway? > > > > > > > > 73- Chuck KI9A > > > > > Chuck, > > > > >The answer is 
pretty simple. To prevent a > multi-transmitter station > > >from using it's 
full capabilities to enter a category where > > the number > > >of transmitters 
in simultaenous use is limited (multi-1 or > multi-2). > > > > >The ten-minute r
 ule takes away most of the advantage of > > having multiple > > >simultaneous 
transmitters while giving the contest sponsors > > a tangible > > >way to 
enforce the rules of the catagory in an objective, > > measurable way. > > > > 
>Otherwise, what's to keep a multi-multi station from entering as > > 
>multi-single? > > > > >Dave/K8CC > > > > > > Very simple, > > M/S can work 
only multiplayers on other band. > > M/2 can work anyqso on 2 bands. > > M/M 
can work anyone anywhere > > > > Dave 9A1UN > > And SOAB could work any qso on 
5 bands with out the > restrictions of 10 min rule > > Why ? It seems for me 
because Contest committee TRUST to > single operators and DO NOT TRUST to 
people who are > participate as a team that they will follow the rule One > 
signal at any one time. > > Let me remind the story how this 10 min rule was 
appear. In > mid 70th several USSR MO station create homemade PA which > allow 
to use it with several transceivers and switch the band > as one of them 
 begin transmit. This techniques allow us to > follow the rule of one signal at 
any time. But CQ committee > do not believe us and put all this "cheaters" to 
MM category > Then appear the 10 min rule. > > That's the story, but may be it 
is the time to revise this > rule and take the same approach for all contesters 
when we > talk about the rule ONE SIGNAL AT ANY TIME. > > Larry > > RW4WZ > > 
_______________________________________________ > CQ-Contest mailing list > 
CQ-Contest@contesting.com > 
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest > > 
_______________________________________________ > CQ-Contest mailing list > 
CQ-Contest@contesting.com > 
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
_______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list 
CQ-Contest@contesting.com 
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>