[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Comments on Proposed Changes to ARRL DX

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Comments on Proposed Changes to ARRL DX
From: "Jeffrey Clarke" <ku8e@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 22:44:31 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I have always been curious how someone is chosen to serve on the CAC ?  My
guess is that is when someone is elected as the director for a division they
appoint someone ? To tell you the truth I didn't even know who is the CAC
representative for the Southeastern Division.  I went to the ARRL Contest
webpage at http://www.arrl.org/contests . I saw no links about the CAC. I
did a search on the ARRL webpage search engine and it returned nothing for
"CAC" or "Contest Advisory Committee".  Is the search engine not working ?
It wasn't until I did a search on Google that I found something -
http://www.arrl.org/arrl-staff-vuac-cac .  I did find another document by
poking are that is the annual report for the CAC for the January 2011 board

See   http://www.arrl.org/committee-reports . I have lived in the
Southeastern division for the past 9 years. I subscribe to reflectors for
two of the bigger contest clubs in our division. Not once have I seen a post
asking for opinions about CAC issues.  I know Charlie , NF4A and he is a
good guy and active contester. To be fair to him I don't know how long he
has been our CAC representative or if there has ever been a reason for him
to solicit feedback. Maybe the ARRL could do a better job of communicating
about what the CAC is and what their responsibilities are.


  I think the changes that are being proposed are only going to affect the
select few that have large contest stations. Plus the New England area has
the best propagation to the highest population area for a DX contest (EU). I
have operated from the East Coast and I will tell you it's a different world
from Georgia. (Or Ohio before I moved south) They have a whole layer of
stations that we don't even hear. I don't think it would make a difference
if you gave us more points per QSO. No disrespect to our friends in JA or
the Pacific region but if I was in New England I would have my antennas
pointed at EU to maximize rate. There really in no reason to concentrate on
those other areas other than working a multiplier because the contest
activity is poor or declining. I made a decision a long time ago that an
investment in a big contest station wasn't worth it for me. I have chosen to
use my resources to travel to the Caribbean at least once a year to get my
"big gun contester" fix.



   If the ARRL wants to increase participation they need to do something
similar to what CQ WPX does with the Tri-Bander/Single Element category. A
new unlimited class(es) should be created for those elite contesters that
have it all - multiple towers with mono-banders/ SO2R/Skimmer/Packet etc.
Let then compete against each other for 48 hours.  If you do this the issues
with cheating might go away. If you think about it this is how many types of
auto racing are structured . The top teams are in Formula One, NASCAR or
Indy Car are the well equipped teams that have many resources. There are
lower divisions for those that don't have the resources to compete in the
higher divisions.



Also please don't make ARRL DX a clone of CQWW. I have always looked at ARRL
DX being similar to the WAE contest. The purpose is for everyone to work our
region of the world. If the ARRL wants to compete against CQWW then create
another separate contest and take your chances...



73, Jeff KU8E 




CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Comments on Proposed Changes to ARRL DX, Jeffrey Clarke <=