Chet - Thanks for your comments.
There was a lot of discussion on here and other platforms before, during, and
after the rules for assistance were changed. I won’t rehash that discussion
here, only to say that the “anything-goes” approach with respect to assistance
has not brought any disaster in VHF contesting since then, and, in my
experience, the rules changes have made my roving more productive. It is
tempting to assign the growth in roving to the relaxed assistance rules, but
while it has helped participation, there are other factors in play. Again, a
topic for another thread.
Now, to your “tongue in cheek” comments. Multiple CQs on the same band are
currently allowed in most ARRL contests, including the VHF contests, as long as
the two signals are not transmitted simultaneously.The transmitters have to be
interlocked and there are HF stations that do this successfully. With the fixed
intervals of the digital modes, and repetitive calling if an exchange is not
copied, this should be pretty straight forward to implement and the hardware
already exists, if not commercially, then home brew versions. I think they call
it SOI2R. Single Operator Interlocked Two Radios. Talk to your local rabid HF
contester. The problem as you point out is keeping receive isolation adequate,
but there may be some approaches that work. Rover pairing is legal under the
Unlimited Rover category, although I do not know of anyone who has done it.
Until recently the Unlimited Rover category has been underutilized, and not
really used as intended. But that has changed recently, and there appears to be
growth in this category as well.
My thoughts. To all, not just Chet, write your director. - Duffey
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
jamesduffey@comcast.net
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|