Hello Helmut,
For many years we (almost all of us, at least) have operated in
accordance with The Amateur's Code published in ARRL
Handbooks for at least ninety years. The problem with dual
interleaved CQs in the same band is that is causes much more
harm than good, especially if many stations adopt the practice.
According to The Amateur's Code (originally the code of ethics,
arguably a better name):
The Radio Amateur is:
CONSIDERATE--- never knowingly operates in such a way
as to lessen the pleasure of others
FRIENDLY -- .....cooperation and consideration for the interests
of others
http://www.arrl.org/amateur-code
Operating two interleaved run frequencies in the same band is
not innovative, its not considerate and its not friendly.
The concepts and capabilities for interleaved run frequencies in the
same band were developed by multi-multi stations more than
thirty years ago. It was soon rejected because its harmful -- not
helpful -- to the contesters and non-contesters we cooperate with
and share the bands with.
The CQ WW rules were changed more then 25 years ago to prohibit it.
The ARRL contest rules were never changed, but most of us clearly
understood that its harmful to the contesters and non- contesters we
share the ham bands with, and --almost without exception -- we
avoided it.
The PJ4G team (and perhaps others) have reminded us that
contesting is not just about us or our team, but also about those
we share the bands with,
Hopefully we'll do the right thing...
73
Frank
W3LPL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Helmut Mueller" <helmut@photo42.de>
To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 5:36:34 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Prohibiting Interleaved CQs - killing Inovation
Hi Guys.
These "new" techniques are just the evolution of contest, deal with it!
There are different contests out there who have different rules and smart
people REALLY understand the rules and apply every effort that is allowed by
the rules! This is called contesting art or INOVATION!
You want to make all contests the same? Keep whining!
Centurys ago someone came up with stacked antennas: I bet there were people
moaning about this.
Centurys ago someone came up with computer logging and keying: I bet there were
people moaning about this.
Centurys ago someone came up with SO2R: People were moaning about this.
There are many more examples like this ... now we have SO2RUN or Interleave
QSOs!
I call this innovation! It is fantastic!
This is from the PJ2T website:
Dedicated to fun, international friendship, and advancement of the contesting
art through superior operating technique and maximum application of technology
Could not say it any better!
73
Helmut DF7ZS
df7zs.de
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] Im Auftrag von W0MU
Mike Fatchett
Gesendet: Wednesday, 15 March, 2017 04:50 AM
An: cq-contest@contesting.com
Betreff: Re: [CQ-Contest] Prohibiting Interleaved CQs on Two or More
Frequencies in the Same Band
If you agree that the rules need to be changed, you need to make your ARRL
Division Directors aware of your feelings. I believe there is a meeting coming
up soon and I believe that this item can be taken up at that time.
Alternating CQ's on different bands is pretty common on RTTY. I think that this
practice should be allowed and monitored to make sure that stations are
adhering to the one transmitted signal at a time for Single ops.
I can only image the situation where we have a wall of stations at
14.150 going up and 14.347 going down for alternating cq's. Add in EU and the
Caribbean and we have a big mess.
W0MU
On 3/14/2017 5:08 PM, Dick Green WC1M wrote:
> I strongly support Frank's proposal, but the prohibition should apply to
> Single Ops, too, as it does in CQ WW.
>
> I realize that multi-op stations are more likely to be equipped to do
> alternating CQs on the same band (A and B radios with two ops on each band,
> multiple antennas per band with good isolation), but it certainly can be done
> in an SO2R station. If only one band is open enough to run, then the impact
> on the spectrum is the same.
>
> Is there a compelling reason to allow Single Ops to do alternating CQs on the
> same band?
>
> Actually, I think a case could be made for banning alternating CQs
> altogether. I'd regret that because I've sometimes used it as a Single Op to
> boost rate or fight boredom, but it definitely does use up more spectrum. If
> only two bands are open in a big contest, that spectrum is likely to be very
> limited. What if a rare mult running low power can't find a place to CQ
> because the alternating CQers are taking up more than their share of space?
> What about the impact on non-contesters?
>
> 73. Dick WC1M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: donovanf@starpower.net [mailto:donovanf@starpower.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:01 PM
> To: CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Prohibiting Interleaved CQs on Two or More
> Frequencies in the Same Band
>
>
> I recommend that alternating CQs on two or more frequencies on the same band
> be prohibited immediately in all ARRL HF contests, exactly as it is now
> prohibited in all CQ WW DX Contests and for multi-operators in the IARU HF
> Championship.
>
> The reason for my recommendation is that the recent success of the
> PJ4G team in CQing on alternate frequencies on the same band (both on
> 20 and 15 meters) in the recent ARRL SSB DX Contest will inevitably be
> applied -- very soon -- by other multi-operator competitors in future
> ARRL contests. Unfortunately this will be to the very considerable
> detriment of other HF spectrum users
> -- both contesters and non-contesters -- because of the very limited
> available spectrum on every HF band below 28 MHz.
>
> The obvious course of action is to simply apply existing IARU HF Championship
> rule 4.3.2.1 to all multi-operator categories in all ARRL HF contests.
>
> 4.3.2.1. Alternating CQs on two or more frequencies on the same band is not
> permitted.
>
> http://www.arrl.org/iaru-hf-championship
>
> A CAC sub-committee is currently engaged in a Rules Consolidation Project to
> consolidate “The General Rules of all ARRL Contests”
> “The General Rules for all ARRL contests Below 30 MHz” and individual contest
> rules into a single rule set for each of the ARRL HF Contests.
>
> In addition to the consolidation of the rules structure, the ARRL Programs
> and Services Committee (PSC) asked the team to develop any accompanying
> commentary they choose as to areas where the perceive that the rules might
> benefit from revision and, where appropriate, to suggest revised language.
>
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Committee%20Reports/2016/J
> uly/Doc_24_0716.pdf
>
> While the CAC's role is solely to respond to projects and issues assigned by
> the ARRL Programs and Services Committee; the CAC chairman can recommend
> future CAC projects and issues to the PSC.
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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
|