CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 minutes M/S rule

To: "'Kenneth E. Harker'" <kenharker@kenharker.com>, "'David Wilburn'" <dave.wilburn@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 minutes M/S rule
From: "Rex Lint" <rex@lint.mv.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:18:18 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Kenneth,

A multi-multi works stations on other bands that don't comply with the 
exception "if—and only if—the station worked is a new multiplier."  It doesn't 
require a 10 minute rule to tell if it was really a multi single... you could 
tell by seeing that it was not a new multiplier, so I don't buy your reason for 
the 10 minute rule.

    -Rex-

Rex Lint, Consultant
     26 Brek Drive
     Merrimack, NH 03054
     PH:    603-860-7651    


-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com 
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kenneth E. Harker
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 3:35 PM
To: David Wilburn
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 minutes M/S rule

David,

    Without a time-limit or a band-change restriction, it would be 
effectively impossible for a log checker to distinguish between a 
multi-single and a multi-multi station.  The station could operate 
multi-multi, submit their log as multi-single, and if questioned 
by the log checkers argue that their one radio (ahem) just changes 
bands really, really quickly.  

    The rule is to make sure that real multi-single stations are
not having to compete against stations that are behaving like 
multi-multi stations.


On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 01:45:30PM -0400, David Wilburn wrote:
> I'm new to contesting, can someone help me understand the point of a 
> 10 minute rule?  I don't quite see why it makes a difference if a 
> station that has multiple operators, but only one transmitter can only 
> switch bands at certain times.
> 
> Because of the second rule, it is implied that they are actually using 
> two transmitters, but only one can transmit at a time.  But it seems 
> like the second rule says the two transmitters each have their own timers.
> 
> Ok, I'm just getting more confused.  I am trying to understand how the 
> pieces fit together.  My wife and middle son are Techs, and I wanted 
> to do a M/S at some point.  Just trying to understand the point of the 
> rule.
> 
> David Wilburn
> NM4M
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kr2q@optimum.net wrote:
> > The CQWW DX Rule:
> > Single Transmitter (MS): Only one transmitter and one band permitted during
> > any 10-minute period.
> > Exception: One—and only one—other band may be used during any 10-minute 
> > period if—and
> > only if—the station worked is a new multiplier. Ten-minute periods are 
> > defined as starting with
> > the first logged QSO on a band.
> > 
> > So if - "1st QSO on 160m logged at 03.12," you count how many minutes you 
> > must be on 
> > the band:
> > 
> > 0312 = 1
> > 0313 = 2
> > 0314 = 3
> > 0315 = 4
> > 0316 = 5
> > 0317 = 6
> > 0318 = 7
> > 0319 = 8
> > 0320 = 9
> > 0321 = 10
> > 
> > You may initiate a "new band" QSO after the 10 minute duration.  Your 
> > "required" time 
> > on 160  (in your example) ends when minute 0321 is completed.  Therefore, 
> > you may 
> > QSY to another band an initiate another QSO starting at 0322.  Then you 
> > have stay 
> > on that "new" band for a DURATION of at least 10 minutes.
> > 
> > PLEASE NOTE that the clock STARTS with the FIRST QSO.  So if you QSY'ed at 
> > 0322, but did
> > not make a QSO until 0325, then you must STAY on the "new" band through and 
> > including
> > minute 0334.  In this example, your next "different band" QSO cannot start 
> > until 0335.
> > 
> > Finally, please note that there are two separate 10 minute rules: one for 
> > the runner and one
> > for the multiplier station.  And, of course, you may stay on the band 
> > (runner or multiplier or both)
> > for MORE than 10 minutes duration if you want to.
> > 
> > Hope this helps,
> > de Doug KR2Q
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

-- 
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.4/1753 - Release Date: 10/29/2008 7:45 
AM

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>