CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Prohibiting Interleaved CQs - killing Inovation

To: k9yc@arrl.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Prohibiting Interleaved CQs - killing Inovation
From: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:20:24 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I would only apply that to 20 meters and up.

Split on 40 and 80 meters is different. In fact, it may even ease
congestion on 40 where everyone is not crammed into 7125-7200.

Ria
N2RJ

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:58 AM, Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
wrote:

> On Wed,3/15/2017 5:52 PM, Radio K0HB wrote:
>
>> I agree that SO-Split is equally hoggish if it consumes two QRG's in a
>> single band segment.
>>
>
> Operators should be DQed for working split during a contest. It consumes
> more than two frequencies, because the callers spread out, and others
> running on those frequencies get clobbered. I won't work ANYONE split
> during a contest.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>