W3PP: So let's do it the way the CQWW rules mandate -- that high-scoring entrants have to allow logs to be public at the discretion of the CQWW committee as a condition of entering the contest. That
WC7S: post, >is what I've felt for quite a while: put more of the thinking, planning and >stratagy back into the efforts, rather than brute force. Fewer radios, yes, >fewer band changes, yes, and a q
This SO2R CW Sprint discussion really is about "it's not how it used to be, or how someone thinks it was intended to be". I have no idea how it used to be or how it was intended to be. My first CW Sp
Can someone from CQ WW answer me whether or not SO(A) is allowed for the team category or if it's SO unassisted only? TNX Scott W4PA W4PA Contest Blog - http://w4pa.journalspace.com What Is Radio Con
"At the largest station in the region, automated and ready for battle I scratch my head realizing there is no separate category to compete SO1R. The hope is that someday soon the results will display
Well, why not? Why aren't we calling for those categories for M/S? There is no reason to segregate one category that is ostensibly "single transmitter" using two rigs as a single op when the exact sa
I have to admit, I am now completely confused about the cheating discussion going on here. C4M's 2006 CQ WW CW log was submitted as SOABHP Assisted, and then he was DQed out of that class for some re
Require anyone with a potential top 5 category placement to submit a recording of all 48 hours of the contest effort along with their log. Clicking packet spots unassisted? Easy to spot. More than on
Really? It was such a bad, non-viable idea that the WRTC-2006 in Brazil implemented it as a rule requirement. If you're serious about trying to win, set up a recording device on your computer and rec
K1TTT: Perhaps. Just like you have to log, you have to record if you expect to win. It is not at all unreasonable. What we're talking about here is a mindset shift, not unlike when the contest commun
Has it ever occurred to you that part of the motivation for making the logs public might be to see what can be done to improve the log checking capabilities of the contest sponsors via entrant sugges
about 1 s-unit. You're going to use SFX/A/K/MUF/LUF hocus-pocus and station details to determine who is using big power and who is not? That's absurd.< I should have said "12 dB or 2 s-units" -- stil
Sounds like DXCC has the problem, not CQ WW. Since I do not participate in the DXCC program I don't concern myself with what happens with my logs after they are submitted to the contest sponsors vis-
I would venture it has the same issue that you have down here in rural Tennessee: it's outer nowhere. Plus you need a real good reason for wanting a mammoth tower like that in your yard ... 99% of p
It's merely adapting M/M technology to a M/S effort. We ran "MO2R" (I guess you could call it that) for years at W4PA/K4JNY for M/S on the run band. Two interlocked rigs with a commutator device I b
W4ZV: You can't legislate it effectively, I think. And my gut reaction is if you're using a piece of computer software to decode CW signals on radios that you are sitting in front of, with no outside
I was wondering what the available DR of the Skimmer itself might be -- there isn't a claimed specification page. Outside of Amateur Radio, Ten-Tec provides receivers that are used for wideband deco
I think you have it backwards. The Skimmer will allow those who use packet while claiming unassisted to fade into the background. Because the Skimmer will display decoded calls and all I have to do
Yes -- I agree. But assuming that (like other technology toys or operating methods) the CW Skimmer or other CW copying/decoding gadgets will not be barred from use, it will be difficult or impossible
... that's impossible, though. Some contest logging programs do not output the exact frequency information to the log for every contest. Other entrants do not have rig control hooked to the PC, and s