On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, John Lindholm wrote:
> There seems to be more ink devoted to the "connected by wires" rule for
> CQWW VHF than it's worth. But let's address the subject.
>
> First, the rule pre-dates my taking over directorship of the contest.
> But that does not relieve my responsibility of interpretation. Bill
> Fisher's [W4GRW] $.02 worth seemed to hit the nail on the head with
> further amplification by Kenny [K2KW].to prohibit remote
> transmitters/receivers from being placed in every grid square and
> controlled from a single location. A check with the CQWW contest
> hierarchy confirms that the rule has been in existence for at least 15
> years as applied to the "family" of CQWW contests and never been
> questioned previously. The first part of the rule re the 500 meter
> diameter circle actually should suffice but the "wires" extension of the
> rules was intended to make sure it's intent was not violated by a
> Philadelphia lawyer.
>
I find that amazingly forward-thinking! We didn't have the technology we
have today to bring that off. Also, we've been having discussions on the
cq-contest reflector about the same subject on HF. I think the concensus
is that it would be OK to operate ONE remote station as your ONLY station
if you're going to go that route. I myself prefer operating VHF+ contests
as a portable station and in a few cases I've enjoyed being a Rover,
although my vehicle isn't really an optimum Rovermobile.
> Interestingly, K9JK may have a good suggestion: including "antennas" in
> the 500 meter definition would obviate any need to mention "wires."
>
> I also note that Dex in the original inquiry did not propose a specific
> scenario in which he proposes to transfer RF from the transmitter to the
> antenna without wires. CQ-VHF is always open to innovation and should
> there be a proposal that meets the higher good of the contest, we'd be
> happy to entertain any such suggestion.
>
I still think waveguide is a great idea! For 50 MHz it would only have to
be about 3 meters wide. :-)
> And, of course, someone has already clarified the situation of making a
> QSO with the coax disconnected. Obviously, this still constitutes using
> an antenna, albeit a rather poor one, perhaps even an SO239.
>
> I once did a "Product Review" for what I think was the first through the
> glass 2-meter mobile induction antenna. QSOs made with such an antenna
> would not count in the contest [that's a joke!!!].
>
> While on the subject of CQ-VHF, the contest is this weekend. Nearly 300
> certificates for 2006 were recently mailed.that's almost as many log
> entries as we had just a couple of years ago. USA rovers please note
> that certificates are now awarded on a regional basis, resulting in more
> certificates issued. Good luck in the contest. 73!!
>
> -- John, W1XX, CQ WW VHF Contest Director
I just received a certificate for last year's contest. I really didn't
expect that but guess I did better as a Rover than I expected, too.
Thanks John!
I hope to make it on as a Hilltopper this year, probably Saturday evening.
73, Zack W9SZ
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|