Rick,
Those are all great ideas and I would favor any and all of them.
Digital bringing new activity is great and I am all for that even if
I don't enjoy digital operation myself. But it also drives activity
away as we are seeing in the post-contest comments. Many of the big
VHF contesters have already left and it seems more are planning to
because for whatever reason they are not finding digital to their
benefit. I think we need to do anything and everything we can to
encourage activity on all modes and keep ***BOTH*** groups of
operators! Furthermore, promoting activity on higher bands should be
a priority. We need to use our bands or risk losing them. Many are
saying that the current situation and use of FT8 on 6 and 2 is doing
the opposite by decreasing QSOs on higher bands.
73,
Paul N1BUG
On 9/18/19 10:43 AM, Rick R wrote:
> I’m resending this to a wider readership. Having been the author
> of the June VHF contest results for QST for several years (prior
> to FT8) I had all of the entrants scores. In a nutshell, 90% of
> those log submissions were “low” scoring casual contesters. My
> read is that most were out to join in the fun, give out points to
> the big guns and multis, say hi to another VHFer and to perhaps
> get some new grids. They operated for a few hours when the bands
> were busy—and the detailed Packrat log reviews done by WA3RLT
> showed the first few contest hours, Sat eve and Sunday eve as
> peak times, at least for the Mid-Atlantic and northeast. Now it
> is far more difficult for that casual op to find the concentrated
> activity except on the FT8 frequency. And moving up the bands
> based on a completed FT8 contact is problematic. More recently I
> have been writing up the QST EME contest results and there are
> similar issues regarding digital vs CW, especially for contests.
> The introduction of JT65 has been a great boon to EME activity,
> yet there is still substantial CW activity. I don’t have any
> solutions to returning to the activity of the past, but here are
> some thoughts. There have been EME contest activities sponsored
> by EU groups (ARI) that were digital only or CW/SSB only. The
> ARRL EME contest separates results of those who use CW/SSB only
> from those who use digital only or digital plus CW/SSB. Many have
> suggested that CW and/or SSB QSOs be given a higher point value
> than digital contacts. Others have proposed credit for multiple
> QSOs on the same band with the same station for 2 or 3 modes.
> Others thought there should be separate contests for digital and
> other modes. Hopefully the ARRL radiosport staff will evaluate
> what is happening and get an adhoc committee to discuss and make
> recommendations regarding VHF contests. We have been given
> fantastic tools with digital programs. We need to be able to
> utilize them and yet maintain a balance that keeps some of the
> personality of the stations and operators on the air that makes
> it easy and fun for the casual VHF contesters who are the real
> majority of those on the air for the contest weekends who help
> feed the logs and scores of the big guns. Rick K1DS
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|