> Haven't seen ANYone pose a viable SOLUTION to either as yet.
There really are only two possible solutions, and one is a terrible
solution.
1.) Ban any equipment capable of breaking some parameter or limit.
This is a terrible solution, because even very small tubes can be pushed to
illegal power if we do not care about signal bandwidth.
It also would require no amplifiers or 200 watt radios in low power entries.
I know many people who, despite how dirty it makes radios, bump power up on
FT1000MP's and other radios to far more than the design value.
2.) Check local signal levels over a period of time, and require the station
to duplicate those levels after the contest. This would take hours of time,
but is the best approach. It would get us within 2-3 dB of knowing power in
some cases, but would not be fool-proof by any means.
Nothing else would work.
Number 1 would create more problems than it solves. Number 2 might work in
some cases. The FCC uses, or used to use, number 2 for good reason.
The way the FCC sometimes did it for HF when multiple antennas or movable
antennas were involved was to watch signal levels at multiple points with
their monitoring system, and get several local field readings. They would
take over the station to duplicate the results.
Because RadioDan advertised an amplifier, we want some people to invest
$20,000 in catching someone within 2-3 dB. I'll kick in the first $50.
I think a better solution is to find out what really bothers people the
most. Do we want certain approved amplifiers? Are we worried most about
splatter?
A solvable problem has to be defined before a solution can occur. Many of
the solutions offered, including equipment size limits, can make problems
like splatter worse.
Personally, I would rather have someone running whatever they want to run
cleanly next to me than someone running a 100 watt radio jacked up to 150
watts on the next operating channel width. What someone does on their
frequency does not bother me as much as what they do on the one I am using.
I'm all for DQ's based on bandwidth. :-)
73 Tom
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|