This part of the VHF contest rules has been suspect and open to debate for at
least 30 years now and I have been VHF-UHF contesting for over 40 years.
Why not get rid of the debate and/or need for further "definition of terms" by
simply restricting all operation and point scoring to "the RADIO frequencies"
within the approved US amateur bands between 50 MHz and 300 GHz.
Most of us veterans have never seen any practical value toward "advancing the
state of the art" by even allowing light wave transmission and detection for
the purpose of these contests.
Ron
WW8RR
________________________________________
From: vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com
[vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Fred Lass
[felasstic@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 8:19 PM
To: Stanford VHF email Remailer; Ev Tupis
Cc: wsvhf@mailman.qth.net; Vhfcontesting Remailer
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [WSVHF] [VHF]
VUAC Seeks Input]
Hi Ev,
I'll volunteer an answer based on my own observations.
The intent of the rule in the first place was to eliminate QSOs with a
flashlight and eyes.
The term coherence has been questioned over the use of monochromatic LEDs
instead of lasers.
All contestants should operate with the same interpretation of the rules.
There is no right or wrong answer and responses that are not focused (pun
intended) are fine.
73, Fred K2TR (Hudson Division VUAC)
--- On Thu, 12/3/09, Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [WSVHF] [VHF] VUAC
Seeks Input]
To: "Stanford VHF email Remailer" <VHF@w6yx.stanford.edu>
Cc: wsvhf@mailman.qth.net, "Vhfcontesting Remailer"
<VHFcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009, 5:31 AM
As this thread becomes more incoherant (many of us don't belong to all of the
lists cc'd, so our replies will be missed)...I keyed in on the actual request,
"to determine if the rule should be modified to make it clearer as to the
meaning of coherence."
Dear VUCC,
You have the advantage. We don't know...
... the intent of the rule's presence in the first place.
... the what way(s) in which the meaning of the term being misunderstood
... what problems this causes for you.
As a result, our commentary is "all over the board". Could you clarify these
three points?
Ev, W2EV
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|