CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Antenna categories

To: rustyhill@earthlink.net
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Antenna categories
From: "Richard Detweiler" <rdetweil@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:01:32 -0600
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I think the idea of a category for antennas is a good.

In Dallas, we have a city ordinance that sets a limit of total antenna area. This is weird to me but its part of the rules we play here. (Which eliminates any new 'quad' antennas, but allows for a single hefty beam on a single tower).

Then on top of that the HOA's in the area virtually eliminate all exterior antennas.

For Skill, it took me 3 years to develop relationships with the HOA to get permissions to set up an small vertical (butternut HF9V with 160M). Then I had to work with each neighbor in the immediate area to work through his or her RFI problems when I finally fired up the 1.5KW linear. I think that personal skill and patients is as important as the contesting skills it-self. So the process of setting up an external antenna in a restricted neighborhood gives me an 'edge' on the others who are limited in external antennas, Same as someone else talking about developing any other edge to get hard earned rewards...

It may be a good time to advocate various antenna categories, and discuss what would be the dividing lines...

We have QRP/LP/HP for power,

We have Single, multi and assisted in some.

Why not add the dimension of antenna,

What we are really talking about is skill and technical recognition for working within defined parameters that we have or set, If one doesn't like a category, they can use the unlimited one, I've often signed on as HP when I only used Low Power. That is always an option for those who don't want to compete in the other league.

Best 73's
Rich
K5SF





From: "Russell Hill" <rustyhill@earthlink.net>
To: <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net>,"Bill Turner" <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>,"Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x@kr6x.com>
CC: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Chiming in -- SO2R
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:37:49 -0600


Hans, I agree with you totally about the operator being the determining factor. That is why I oppose having an SO2R category. It is wrong to legislate against a hard-earned technique to benefit those who won't/can't learn the technique. That includes me: I cannot do SO2R-- the guy who can will beat me every time. Good on 'im!!

However I do not see how a 'limited category' recognizing the 'more modest, traditional station' could possibly "only set an upper limit which ultimately would stifle the spirit of competition." QRP and LowPower, Single Op vs Multi, Single Band vs All Band, and for that matter CW Only, SSBonly, or mixed, none of these set an upper limit. Why would a category which allows a limited antenna station to compare his scores with similarly equipped stations be any different? Particularly if it makes contesting more attractive to a larger segment of ham radio, it seems to me it could only be good for our community.

I would like to comment on the Tri Bander/Wire category. There are some truly garguantian tribanders out there. Such an antenna on top of a 70 ft tower with lots of wires could be a very effective station. But the guy with a 10M monobander on top of a 28 ft pushpole, such as I had years ago, would not be able to play in the TB catagory. I simply believe that a category based on height, rather that a stipulated antenna configuration, would allow more of the "modest, traditional" to feel enthusiastic about joining in with us. With a simple, easily understood height limitation, an op could put up whatever antenna configuration he chose for the particular contesting style interests him.

Thanks, Hans. I always enjoy your posts. Sometimes I even agree.

73, Rusty, na5tr

----- Original Message ----- From: "K0HB " <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net>
To: "Bill Turner" <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>; "Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x@kr6x.com>
Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Chiming in -- SO2R



[Original Message]
From: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>

This new limited category could be defined so as to
attract new people with a more modest,
traditional station into contesting, knowing they
had a chance to get their feet wet and still be
competitive.

Wouldn't make a bit of difference, Bill.


I could turn my existing "limited" station over to any of several local
operators for CQWW (N0AT, K0SR are a couple who come to mind) while I
operated the super-station at W0AIH.  They'd still beat me hands down,
every time.

WRTC is an interesting sideshow, designed to showcase the talents of a
narrow slice of our elite compatriots by attempting to construct
artificially 'equal' operating situations for them.  Your "limited"
category couldn't be an equalizer of that same sort; it could only set an
upper limit which ultimately would stifle the spirit of competition.

73, de Hans, K0HB





_______________________________________________
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>