[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question (yet again)

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question (yet again)
From: Hank Greeb <n8xx@arrl.org>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:17:44 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
So, during a contest, if I call CQ every so often in an attempt to 
"run", with marginal to N1L results, is it okay to check whether my call 
shows up on the RBN when I'm in a "off" period, R&R, etc.  Or should I 
specify "assisted?"  In the search I "mycall" - no others.  I use the 
info only to confirm or refute my impression of the results I've been 
obtaining from my attempts at "runs."

Another question, when there's a cacophony of S9+99 signals being heard 
by the Skimmers on the RBN, like in an international DX contest, will a 
pipsquoke signal from my mighty 5 Watts to a cloud warmer antenna be 
harder to be heard by these Skimmers?  In other words, does the "overall 
level of incoming signals" lower the threshold at which a very weak 
signal can be heard?

After the recent CQWPX was over, I checked for my call, I knew I tried 
calling CQ for as long as 10 minutes repetitively, but was heard only a 
couple times by the RBN skimmers.  Yet, I was working stations from 
various parts of the world - many with no problems hearing me - but >95% 
while I was S&P.

Just curious.

73 de n8xx Hg
Operated WQ8RP during WPX 2012

On 5/31/2012 1:47 PM, cq-contest-request@contesting.com wrote:
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 09:07:47 -0500
> From: K0HB<kzerohb@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question (yet again)
> To: Bob Naumann<W5OV@W5OV.COM>
> Cc: David Gilbert<xdavid@cis-broadband.com>,
>       "<cq-contest@contesting.com>"<cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<178691E3-A081-4B78-B632-B06730F73A7A@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset=us-ascii
> I was trying (maybe not well) to point out that SCP isn't very different from 
> other assistance except for the quality of immediacy.
> 73, Hans
> On May 31, 2012, at 8:44 AM, "Bob Naumann"<W5OV@W5OV.COM>  wrote:
>> Hans,
>> I'm afraid you've missed the point.
>> "Other forms of assistance such as packet" are specifically precluded by the 
>> rules for single ops already.
>> So, there is no debate about whether packet (and all of the various forms of 
>> spotting networks) should be considered assistance. It already is.
>> -Bob
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: K0HB [mailto:kzerohb@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 8:36 AM
>> To: Bob Naumann
>> Cc: David Gilbert;<cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or not assisted question (yet again)
>> Bob, every point you make, other than the "real time" issue, could be made 
>> at some level for other forms of assistance such as packet.
>> (and on slow packet days....)
>> 73, de Hans, K0HB
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>