Hello to VHF Contesters.....Below is a proposal that I have forwarded to
my VUAC representative for consideration. Please read the proposal and
if you agree, send your comments to that effect to your own VUAC rep.
You can find your VUAC rep at
http://www.arrl.org/contests/vuac.html....with one exception that I know
of. The West Gulf VUAC rep is Army Curtis,
AE5P--acurtis@suddenlink.net. Army is new to this position, but he will
be a good rep for our Division.
I would appreciate it if you would copy me with your comments. I have
gotten some really good ideas from the posts of others and I am sure
that will continue. I believe that Assisted classes will be a very
popular with contesters....certainly the "polls" so far show that to be
the case. Please note that I am not trying to take anything away from
the guys that want to S&P. I just want a class where I can maximize the
number of contacts that I make.
73 to all.....Marshall K5QE
PROPOSAL TO THE VUAC
Subject: Having Assisted Classes in all ARRL VHF/UHF contests
About one month ago, at the request of our new Divsion Manager, David
Woolweaver, K5RAV, I wrote a "white paper" about VHF/UHF contesting,
ideas, and practice. I submitted my first draft to 15 very well known
VHF ops and asked for their comments--in support or in opposition. I
received 5 replies that were very strong positives and one negative. I
made a few word changes and then posted the article on the VHFContesting
reflector. That "white paper" is presented as Appendix 1 below.
After posting to the VHFContesting reflector, I received 26 positive
responses(some very strong positives), 4 negatives, and 4 wishy-washy(I
don't care) responses. All the responses from VHF operators in the West
Gulf Division were either positive or strongly positive--there were no
negative responses at all. I was expecting this as there is a good
consensus on these ideas in our area.
Via the responses that I received, I have come to understand that there
are some ops who believe in what most would call Search &
Pounce(S&P)--tuning the bands carefully, listening for others calling CQ
or calling CQ yourself, and making whatever contacts come your way. The
people who are into this mode of operation believe that this method
produces a contact that is "more pure", "more valid", or "more valuable"
than contacts made via schedules.
I have nothing against the guys that wish to operate in this manner and
I believe that they should continue to operate in a manner that they
enjoy. However, to those of us that believe in "making as many contacts
as possible, on as many different bands as possible, to as many
different VHF stations as possible, for as long a distance as possible",
this is just not a very efficient method of operation. I want to be
WORKING as many stations as possible during the contest period. As I
said in Appendix 1, "In the VHF world, you must have precise control of
antenna pointing(both directions), frequency, mode, sequencing, and the
time of the attempt to make a single contact". Assistance makes this
possible as opposed to just hoping that you "bump" into another station
on the bands.
For these reasons, I would like to propose to the VUAC the following
concepts--to be implemented via rule changes in the Rules for VHF Contests.
1. The strict definition of what constitutes a VHF contact must be
observed. It is our duty as VHF operators and Elmers to teach this and
via word and deed to respect it.
DISCUSSION: Some VHF ops have become "sloppy" about what constitutes a
VHF contact. We should have definite and clear rules stating what
constitutes a contact and we should "preach" them. I operated the ARRL
DX phone contest last weekend. I would venture to say that NONE of
those contacts, which are routinely accepted practice in the HF world,
would be valid VHF contacts. This is not to criticize the standards of
the HF world, it is just to indicate that the two standards are different.
2. VHF contesting should be about "making the contacts"....making as
many contacts as possible, on as many different bands as possible, to as
many different VHF stations as possible, for as long a distance as possible.
DISCUSSION: This seems self-evident to me.
3. All VHF contests should have an Assisted class of operation.
Stations in an Assisted class may make schedules at any time via any
means--however, the strict definition of what makes a VHF contact must
be carefully observed.
DISCUSSION: Those ops that want to be Non-Assisted can continue
operating as they wish, in their own class. Stations that want to
maximize their contacts during the event, can enter the Assisted Class.
Currently, HF contests have Assisted classes, but in the VHF world, the
only "assistance" allowed is on 2.3GHz and above in the EME contest.
There are no other Assisted classes in the ARRL's VHF world. This seems
strange to me--that the HF world has plenty of Assisted classes and we
have essentially none. NOTE: There was an Assisted class in the EME
contest for the last couple of years. Judging by logs sent in, it was
the most popular class. However, this class is scheduled to be deleted.
Because I believe that "Contacts are King", how and when "assistance" is
rendered is just not an important issue. If you make a schedule before
the contest or during the contest, is just not relevant.....you still
have to WORK the other station while observing the strict definition of
what constitutes a VHF contact(Tilton's Rule). Via reflectors and/or
propagation loggers, you would know who was on and where they were.
This would allow you to work as many of them as possible. Since
everyone(except Rovers) has the Internet these days, there is no
advantage to one station over another. On the other side of that coin,
it does me no good to know that W7XYZ/R is in CN88 ready to run the
bands. I can't work him anyway.
Speaking of rovers, how will all this affect them? The most common
complaint that I have heard from rover stations is that they arrive at
some new grid, sometimes a rare one, and they cannot "attract" anyone's
attention. So they sit there for an hour or two and work only a very
few stations. I have heard this complaint over and over again--from
rovers here in the West Gulf Division as well as from rovers around the
country. It is very frustrating to the rover guys when this
happens--and it seems to happen a lot. An Assisted Rover could call
several of the big stations in his area on the cell phone and alert them
that "I am in EL28 and ready to run". This would allow the rover to
work as many stations as possible--which is, after all, why he is out
there. As an added bonus, other stations(both Assisted and
Non-Assisted) would hear these contacts being made. This would result
in additional contacts that would otherwise never occur.
I believe that ALL VHF contesting should be Assisted, however, in
deference to those that want to do S&P with no outside help, I am
suggesting that we have Assisted classes and Non-Assisted classes. This
permits each operator to enter a class of operation that suits his / her
"modus operandi".
Thank you for your attention to this proposal and the ideas presented
herein.
Sincerely,
Marshall P. Williams, K5QE
APPENDIX 1: My posting to the VHFContesting reflector
CONTESTING PHILOSOPHY:
I have been seriously contesting in the VHF/UHF world since June 2004.
Hence, there are surely guys with a LOT more VHF+ contesting experience
than I. However, I have been a VHFer since the late 60's when I became
really hooked on Meteor Scatter(MS). My Elmer there was none other than
Dick, K0MQS, the holder of 2M WAS #1. Dick explained the very strict
definition of what constituted a VHF contact and that all serious VHF
operators were careful to abide by this convention. The definition of
what constitutes a VHF contact was given to us by Ed Tilton and has been
in use for 50+ years. Every VHF operator that I have ever known, knows
this "convention" and abides by it. I shall call it "Tilton's Rule".
For those that may not know, the definition of a valid VHF contact
requires that BOTH stations receive BOTH calls, some piece of
information(usually a signal report or grid), and confirmation that the
information was received(i.e. a ROGER). Once a contact attempt begins,
communication via ANY other means is prohibited. Doing so, invalidates
the contact and you must start again from the beginning.
Over the years, I have spent a lot of time and effort station building
and operating in the hopes of working some good DX on the VHF/UHF
bands. Everyone that I know likes to work "that rare one" on long range
tropo, MS, AU, or EME. As long as the strict definition for a VHF
contact was observed, the contact is counted for WAS, DXCC, VUCC, and
whatever else is lying around.
Recently, I have come to understand that there are two different ideas
of what contesting should be about. I will call these two philosophies
the HF Philosophy and the VHF Philosophy. I am not sure that I like
these two names, but I cannot think of anything better. While the names
indicate the heritage of the ideas, it is clear that there will be some
people that don't fall in either camp. However, I have observed that
operators who were HF ops for many years and then came over to VHF, tend
to believe in the HF Philosophy. Ops that started out in the VHF world
and VHF contesting, tend to believe in the VHF Philosophy. I suspect
that this is basically true through out the country.....but maybe not.
Operators who believe in the HF Philosophy believe that ALL of
contesting is "Did you find that rare one in Africa??". Their emphasis
is on FINDING stations rather than WORKING stations. Apparently, in the
HF world, it is just assumed that if you find one, you will work him.
There are rules, upon rules, upon rules that govern HOW you are allowed
to find a station to work.
Operators who believe in what I call the VHF Philosophy believe that
"You can either work a station or you can't." The emphasis here is on
WORKING stations rather than FINDING them. In other words, VHF
contesting should be about MAKING the CONTACTS. In the VHF world, you
must have precise control of antenna pointing(both directions),
frequency, mode, sequencing, and the time of the attempt to make a
single contact. It often happens in the VHF world, that even though you
know exactly the call of a station and exactly where he/she is located,
you cannot work that station on a given band.
When I first began VHF contesting, I kept running into what I will call
the "Thou Shalt Not" rules in the ARRL contests. I could not understand
what those rules were about--why they were in there--what purpose did
they serve? All these rules seemed to do was to limit the number of
contacts that you could make--to artifically lower your score. To those
of us that belive contesting should be about making the contacts, those
rules make no sense. I have found that most of those rules were "pushed
up" into the VHF world from the HF world. These rules have an HF
heritage. I have talked with several well-known old-time VHFers and
they agree with me on this point.
In contrast to the ARRL's horde of "Thou Shalt Not" rules, the CQ WW VHF
contest has practically no such rules. You may call a station on the
phone, send him an email, look at a propagation reflector, whatever--but
you still have to actually WORK the guy. Making contacts in a contest,
what a novel approach! There is a reason why the CQ WW VHF contest has
become the "Fourth Major". The lack of artificial restrictions is
certainly an important part of this contest's "charm".
It may be that all this revolves around what the HF ops call
"Assistance". I really don't like this word, because it does not
describe what is going on. Unfortunately, the word has become a
multi-valued word. When some ops use the word assistance, they mean
help in setting up a schedule during the contest period. When others
use the word, they mean that someone is using a telephone during the
middle of a contact attempt saying, "OK, I am sending O's now, can you
hear my O's??" Others use assistance to mean setting up a schedule
before the contest even starts. There may be other uses too.
Apparently, in the HF world, "assistance" vs "no assistance" is a really
big deal. Even though I have been in the VHF world for 40+ years, I had
never heard the term "assistance" until last year. This is why the
"assistance" vs "no assistance" thing just does not make any sense to me
at all.
Every real VHF op knows that you cannot use "assistance" during a
contact attempt to confirm parts of the contact. "Everyone knows" that
this invalidates the contact attempt. I have never met a real VHF op
that engaged in this sort of thing. This use of the word assistance is
just a non-starter.
Another use of the "assistance" word is to regulate the making of
schedules. Currently, the ARRL rules prohibit making a schedule during
the contest(using non-Amateur means). Since the ARRL cannot regulate
conduct before the contest begins, an operator is free to make as many
schedules as he/she wishes before the contest starts. I have learned
that in the HF world, you are a "terrorist with a box cutter on the
plane" if you make schedules before a contest.
However, it is extremely common practice in the VHF world to make
schedules before a contest--especially on digital MS or EME. I don't
understand how there is any significant difference between setting up a
schedule before the contest period begins or after. You still have to
actually WORK the guy. If you can/do work the other station, the
contact should count, just as it does in every other facet of the VHF
world. If you can't work the other station, you can make all the
schedules that you want, but you will just be wasting your contest
time. Consider this scenario: it is perfectly legal for Amateurs to
set up a regional 40M or 75M net during the contest and use these nets
to make/coordinate schedules(such as for digital MS). But if one were
to do this via Ping Jockey, then you are a child molester with bad
breath and a bad haircut as far as the ARRL is concerned. The
distinction is meaningless and silly--you can either work the other guy
or you cannot. How or when you make a schedule is not
relevant.....contacts are what count. However, the strict definition of
a VHF contact MUST be observed.
Practically everyone believes that the "Rules for VHF Contesting" are
not working correctly. Various well meaning and thoughtful people are
making detailed proposals concerning how to fix this bit of minutia or
that bit. I believe that if we don't get the "First Principles"
correct, there will never be any hope of "fixing" the ARRL's VHF contest
rules.
Here is what I and many others in our area believe are the FIRST PRINCIPLES:
1. The strict definition of what constitutes a VHF contact must be
observed. It is our duty as VHF operators and Elmers to teach this and
via word and deed to respect it.
2. VHF contesting should be about "making the contacts"....making as
many contacts as possible, on as many different bands as possible, to as
many different VHF stations as possible, for as long a distance as possible.
3. Hence, ALL VHF should be "Assisted"(in the ARRL's use of the word).
Stations may make schedules at any time via any means--however, the
strict definition of what makes a VHF contact must be carefully
observed. I realize that the hidebound HF ops at HQ are going to have
heart fribrillations over this idea--because their experience and
training are rooted in the HF world and the HF Philosophy. However,
what is right for the HF contests is not necessarily right for VHF
contests. A possible compromise is that ALL VHF contests provide
"Assisted Classes" of operation.
Rational discussion and / or ideas are welcomed, preferably off the
reflector. I have tried hard to wordsmith this discussion so that it
was not inflamatory or insulting to anyone. If someone can show me how
to better present these ideas, I welcome their helpful criticism.
Please don't send me flames telling me that:
1)The rules are the rules and we should just obey them. Before Little
Rock, black Americans were forced into substandard schools, required to
use "Black Only" drinking fountains and restrooms, and other such
indignities, because that was "The Law". Of course it was all wrong and
the laws were eventually overturned.
2)I am an ARRL hater and just want to see the ARRL destroyed. I don't
hate the ARRL at all. I am a member of the ARRL and have been for
several years. Like 20% of the ham population, I get my copy of QST in
the mailbox every month.
If you agree with me on this, please stand up and start working towards
its acceptance. If you do not, please try to explain WHY this is the
wrong concept. "This is the way the HFers do it and so it must be
right" and "We have always done things this way, don't rock the boat"
are not rational reasons or explanations.
Finally, HF ops tend to believe that HF contesting and VHF contesting
are the same. Of course, most have never operated VHF, but they remain
very strong in their beliefs. Most VHF ops tend to believe that HF and
VHF contesting ARE significantly different and hence should / could have
different concepts and rules. Again, I will say that the correct rules
for HF contesting and VHF contesting do not necessarily have to be the
same.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|