Marshall,
One problem with internet activity is that people tend to hang out on
chat pages and run to a ham band, make a QSO and then go back to the chat
page. I have seen a drop in real radio activity around here as chat pages
became more common. The poor guys with no internet connection are at a
disadvantage then. They have trouble even tail ending an internet influenced
QSO. (Tell me about it!)_I did not have any internet at my remote ham shack
in the past, and was getting killed in the Sprints etc as a result. Being in
an outlying area, the number of people aiming my way were minimized as a
result of my not being connected to the internet. Oh well, I bit the bullet
and installed a high speed 5 GHz link up to the shack. I now have a high
speed internet connection with very strong signal levels even during ice and
snow storms. So I can go with the flow either way!
73
Dave K1WHS
Lebanon, ME
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marshall-K5QE" <k5qe@k5qe.com>
To: "vhfcontesting@contesting.com" <VHFcontesting@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2014 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Comments on ARRL VHF/UHF Contest Rules Change
Proposals
Hello Jay, James, and others interested in this topic. The Committee
identified three "goals" in their post.
1) Removal of the current prohibition on the use of Amateur and
non-Amateur forms of assistance for all operator categories, with such use
having no impact on entry category;
2) Removal of the current prohibition on self-spotting for all operator
categories; and
3) Allowing single operators to transmit on more than one band at a time.
Regarding 1), this allows Single Op stations to "look" at the Internet. I
have never understood why there were so many (silly) restrictions on the
Single Op stations. I once posted that the ARRL rules discriminate
against the Single Op stations...and many folks agreed with me. Many
Single Ops use the Internet now, but of course, no one can prove it one
way or the other. Removing this prohibition will put everyone on the same
page as far as looking at the Internet is concerned.
Regarding 2), this rule is of the utmost importance. Currently, the CQ WW
VHF contests allow stations using digital MS or digital EME to "self post"
their Call, Frequency, and Sequence ONLY. It is no coincidence that the
CQ WW VHF contest is the best contest that we have. I know that the HF
Philosophy types are having heart palpitations, but they don't operate VHF
contests. In any HF contest, you can find a never ending stream of
stations to work. That is most certainly not the case in the VHF affairs.
Self posting, i.e. Announcements, will allow stations to find each other
during the contests. Rovers would be able to let the big stations know
where they were and when they were ready to run. Stations searching for
MS contacts or EME contacts will be able to find others using the same
methods. Most especially, the smaller stations will be able to find the
"big guns" if they know where to look. That means more QSOs for everyone.
Regarding 3), I originally saw this as just removing another silly
restriction from the Single Ops. Jay's comments have caused me to
re-think this one. I am and always have been a Multi Op station, so for
me, transmitting on multiple bands at once is just normal. What Jay is
saying is that this might / will give the stations in the "Golden
Crescent" another unfair advantage over the Single Ops in the rest of the
country(Jay...I hope I restated that correctly).
However, I have run into Single Ops that use SO2R techniques to call CQ
alternatively on 6M and 2M in such a way that they are never transmitting
on two bands at the same time. They call it "dueling CQs". The effect of
this is that they ARE ON two bands at the same time without ever
transmitting on two bands at the same time. This is clearly just a
technological solution to skirt around the current rule. On the other
hand, I don't know of anyone around here that is doing this, so maybe this
practice is not widespread.
Hence, I am neutral on 3). I am waiting to be re-educated on this one.
Please try to keep the comments relatively civil....
The Committee also did some nice house cleaning on the FM side of things.
They propose removing the restriction on 146.52 and on use of repeaters to
solicit contacts. The contacts must still be made on simplex frequencies.
This will not help me personally, as there is essentially no FM activity
around here for me to work. But it may help others. Unfortunately, there
is the distinct possibility that this may only give another advantage to
the NE stations where there are a lot more stations close by, many of them
little FM stations. I agree that the NE stations do not need any more
advantages over the rest of us.....
As always, your comments are of interest to me, Pro or Con. Flames,
diatribes, etc. will go directly to the bit bucket....they will not pass
GO and will not collect $200. Respectful, well thought out comments will
not collect $200 either, but that is another story.....
The best of Holiday Seasons to everyone....
73 Marshall K5QE
On 12/5/2014 6:12 PM, Keith Morehouse wrote:
If you don't live on the east coast and want to top 10 in a VHF contest
someday, I would urge you to think long and hard about adopting this
rule...
Jay W9RM
Keith J Morehouse
via Droid Inc2
On Dec 5, 2014 4:29 PM, "James Duffey" <jamesduffey@comcast.net> wrote:
If you have comments on the proposed rules changes for VHF/UHF contests,
they are due December 15 to the committee at < vhf-input@arrl.org >.
I personally am not going to campaign here for any of the rules changes,
except for the one allowing single op stations to have multiple signals
on
different bands at the same time without being in the multi category. I
think that this will increase activity as it will increase signals on
the
air, so someone who tunes to the bands during a contest is more likely
to
hear activity. This should also help with the problem of people ignoring
the higher bands when 6M is open by encouraging ops to use SO2R
techniques.
If 6M is open, the single op can still CQ on two at the same time, and
pickup stations calling there. I don’t see any down side to this
proposed
change, and I encourage you to comment favorably on this proposed rules
change.
In the past there has been a lot of discussion here, and elsewhere, on
assistance in VHF/UHF contests, and I hope that those who have been
vocal
on both sides of that issue have made or will make their input to the
committee known. The proposed rules are very liberal with respect to
assistance, even with respect to the CQ WW VHF contest rules, so I
encourage you to read the proposed changes and ponder their consequences
for you and others. Then make constructive comments on the proposals.
The proposed rules allow self spotting pretty much in all categories and
pretty through all vehicles. This is a big change with potentially big
consequences, so I encourage you to comment on this as well. Consider
that
self spotting is not thought of well by most of the HF contesters and
those
are some of the new activity that the committee is trying to attract.
Read and study the proposed rules changes. Make your concerns and
desires
known to the committee now. Don’t pass on this opportunity. If rules are
adapted that you don’t like and you didn’t comment on them to the rule
makers, then it will be hard to seriously take your criticism of them
later. Just saying. - Duffey KK6MC
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
_______________________________________________
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
|