We're now a few days past what is likely the last COVID affected contest. What do y'all think should or will happen with M/M Distributed. Designated as a one time COVID exception, I can see this as
I think it should stay. It helps to promote new technology and interfacing. Remote operating, even to your own station, is hear to stay. Mike va3mw _______________________________________________ CQ-
I think it should stay. It generated significant activity using cutting-edge technology. In my case, as one of the operators, it got me to operate a contest I usually don't play in. More activity is
Author: Ron Notarius W3WN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 13:47:12 +0000 (UTC)
Going forward, the question in my mind would be "are there going to be enough M/M teams worldwide operating in future contests to make the category viable?" If there are only a very few capable and w
Author: K8MR via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:00:17 +0000 (UTC)
The M/M D offers interesting challenges, technical and organizational, to which the various groups responded very well. Does it make things better for the rest of us? I doubt it. What we need are lot
With all due respect I don't know why CQ allowed this category in the first place. IMO it was used to promote and get publicity for a remote ham radio company. The owner of that company will argue th
IMHO It should stay. Several not so well equipped stations with operators who are unable to operate full 48 hours can share their resources and operate only part time and yet it feels like real M/M o
Good question Steve! If I recall, the category was first adopted by ARRL and then later by CQ WPX. Not sure that it's continuation has anything to do with RHR... I don't see much downside for it to c
Absent COVID-19 and associated efforts to limit in-person contact it seems like a solution in search of a problem. As KU8E pointed out, the continental US zones are huge and propagation can vary sign
<snip> It involves co-operation, tactics, strategy planning and amplifies the pleasure of contesting by the number of participating operators. This ignores the elephant in the room. M/M Distributed
The question is, "Does it hurt?" The most common argument that I have heard is that it takes away operators. But really, how many? To counter that, how many are added that wouldn't have been there ot
It was a terrible idea from the beginning, and it should die! Contesters want MORE stations to work, not fewer. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ
The same could be said about traditional M/M. How many active callsigns are you removing from the contest by consolidating them at K3LR and W3LPL (in normal times)? As I said earlier, I would not hav
The big difference will be travel time and travel expenses and no reason to build a big M/M station you hear just a few times during the year. Any station you worked six times is just taking up spect
Author: K8MR via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 20:11:04 +0000 (UTC)
Of course we're all taking up spectrum. But had the RHR stations operated as three separate non-distributed multis (including remote operators - that is not the issue), 12 more QSOs would have been a
I wondered who WW1X was.... Friday evening 15 minutes before the start WW1X was calling CQ TEST on 28000.3.... at 0000 I gave them a call for my 001 and they gave me back 5nn 001 but 5 minutes later
For some reason, I had assumed that this was a one time add for COVID. Looking at the original announcement, this does not appear to be the case. So I would assume it is here to stay. My mind and h
Paul, The same argument could be made for ANY remote operation, and you are most definitely swimming upstream (and mostly alone) on that. And in spite of the countless times you have mercilessly flog
Id like to see it disappear. It actually diminishes the number of available workable stations. 73, de Hans, KØHB Just a Boy and his Radio ________________________________ From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest
So CQ appears to be open to adding new categories? I find this interesting considering that a prominent member of the CQ Contest Committee made a comment during the Dayton Contest University that "we