CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] It's time for an Assisted category in NAQP

To: wk6i.jeff@gmail.com, n4zr@comcast.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] It's time for an Assisted category in NAQP
From: K8MR via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Reply-to: jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 20:06:32 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
 Something else that merits a look is a way to make it practical for multiops 
to spend some time on dead bands, i.e. 10 meters. 



This past weekend there was a small amount of Es floating around, but presently 
the top 15 multiop scores on 3830 have a total of 19 ten meter QSOs, 11 of them 
by K5RM.


As a single op I'd like to have a multiop be willing to QSY for a needed mult, 
something the present 10 minute rule pretty much eliminates. 



I do agree that some limitations are needed to keep two transmitters from 
becoming three or four or five or six. But there must be some middle ground 
that would let multis help provide some activity on such "dead" bands.





73  -  Jim  K8MR





 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>
To: N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net>
Cc: Chris Hurlbut <chriskl9a@gmail.com>; reflector cq-contest 
<CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 7, 2018 5:51 pm
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] It's time for an Assisted category in NAQP

Sounds more like the Multi rule needs changing to allow for single seat
multiple operator SO2R operation. Such operations are a great way to have
SO2R training sessions with developing contesters. Then one person can
choose to be a multi and work assisted if they wish.

73 jeff wk6i

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:48 AM, N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net> wrote:

> Judging by the commentary recently on various reflectors (and my own
> experience last weekend), it is time for NAQP to institute an Assisted
> category, rather than lumping all one-transmitter assisted stations into
> Multi-2.  The M-2 class's band change rule makes zero sense for one
> transmitter assisted - I'll be losing credit for some QSOs because it never
> occurred to me that it would cover a single-transmitter competitor.
>
> ARRL 160 CW and ARRL 10M contests got rid of this anachronism a few years
> ago - it's time for NAQP to follow suit.  I don't know who decides such
> things, but trust that Chris will know who needs to take action.
>
> --
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR


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

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