Count me as one of those who strongly disagree with allowing :
1. Use of anything but a 2 tube regenerative receiver
2. Use a computer logging.
3. use of more than 10 watts output power
4. Use of anything more than a simple wire antenna, not more than 20
feet above ground.
My reasoning is
1. I'm an olde fogey retiree, on fixed income. I can't afford anything
but the 2 tube regenerative receiver I built in 1950 with parts my
father gave me.
2. Neither can I afford a computer (I'm using one at my local library to
access my e-mail). Besides, my father successfully used a quill and ink
for logging in the sp*rk gap daze, so it should be intuitively obvious
that computers aren't necessary for communications.
3. My 6V6 transmitter puts out about 3 watts on a good day, but I
figured that 10 watts is "fair" since it's not more than 10 dB what i
can afford.
4. My antenna is between two trees, and I dare not put it higher than 20
feet lest swaying of the tree cause it to break. I can't afford a tower
and beam, because of considerations listed in # 1.
My reasoning was reinforced by several messages "against'" the use of
modern technology by some folks who have posted in this forum. Prior to
this I figured that we should embrace new technology as it was
developed, yet the cacophony of "Nay" votes seem to dictate otherwise.
So, why not go back to the 1920's or so with technology and make it easy
for even those with minimal investment and minimal operating skill to
compete?
73 de n8xx Hg
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|