CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Checklog Charlie

To: sawyered@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Checklog Charlie
From: Mike Reublin NF4L <nf4l@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 10:34:26 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I'm missing something here. How is it the fault of the rig that xmit freq. 
isn't logged? Any modern rig is capable of supplying the frequency of both 
VFOs. It's a trivial matter for the software to request it. It just isn't 
tradition. 

If the contest sponsors require it, the programmers will include it. Course 
you'd also have to know if split was on.

73, Mike NF4L
 
> On May 9, 2015, at 7:05 AM, Ed Sawyer <sawyered@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> W2LC wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> "Neither my radio or software is capable of logging the transmit frequency
> for 
> 
> me, so does that mean I can no longer submit a log for CQWW?  
> 
> 
> 
> The software is not the big issue but the radio is. What is the cost of
> adding 
> 
> my transmit frequency to my log? About $5k USD for a good radio decent
> filters 
> 
> and other accessories. Is that the price of entry into CQWW?  Quite honestly
> my 
> 
> older radio still works pretty well and I do not see getting many more QSOs
> due 
> 
> to a new radio. The ROI would be very low.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it now the policy of the CQWW committee to say to older radio users "we 
> 
> don't want you in this contest"?"
> 
> 
> 
> --------
> 
> Actually, since you already have an older radio, the cost of good clean
> FT1000MP with decent filters on the used market is about $1,400.  And for
> $100 you can buy virtually any contest software. So the real need is more
> like $1,500 - not $5,000.
> 
> 
> 
> And the point of it, if required, would not be that you can't participate in
> the contest and submit your log, but rather you might not be eligible for
> significant awards.
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the separation of the 6,000+ entrants that are enjoying
> themselves from the 1,000 that are truly competing would be a good thing for
> the sport.  Requiring those that are actually "in it to compete and do well"
> something that is completely unnecessary for the rest of the crowd is fine
> if someone knows it's the "price of admission" to be a competitor.  Nothing
> in this world worth competing for is cheap to play in or easy to win.  Why
> should radiosport be any different?
> 
> 
> 
> Ed  N1UR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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>