CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SS Sundays

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS Sundays
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Reply-to: n2ic@arrl.net
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:15:55 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On 02/06/2013 11:42 AM, RT Clay wrote:

Yes, the fix is simple: shorten the overall length to 24 hours. Still keep a required 
off time of 6 hours. > The off time is important to allow stations in different parts 
of the country to choose the best times to > operate (day/night). That is 
particularly important for small stations. Choosing when to take off is also > part 
of SS strategy.

I could almost warm up to this. Except I would say get rid of the required off time. Go 24 hours if that's what you want.

With 24 hours total the exact start time doesn't matter either as far as 
propagation- it covers a full day.

0000Z to 2359Z . That should make Sunday more interesting - it will be the first opportunity for significant high band propagation, and there would be only one night-time opportunity.

I'm sure the average qso speed in SS has gone up over the years- computer 
logging/etc, plus the exchange used to be longer. So it makes sense to make the 
whole thing shorter.

That is absolutely true. I have listened to recordings from the 1970's. Much slower. That was the way to pick up the hoards of newly-licensed General's who could barely do 13 WPM.

Yes, records get messed up. But they already get messed up every time a new 
section is added.

Agreed.

If SS is shortened, I could even warm up to grandfathering the old records and starting new records.

73,
Steve, N2IC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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