This is no different than having a car that can exceed the speed limit.
Is it the fault of the car maker for providing car capable of excess
speed? Or is it the fault of the driver.
The responsibility lies solely with the operator. I know this is
probably a quaint concept given the larger cultrial trend abrogating
personal responsibility, but fundamentally it's the job of the operator
to run his station properly. And that includes using slow rise times
for rigs that provide such adjustment.
Having said that, having the adjustment range covering this lower rise
times does make it easy for trouble as I know personally. NC0B kindly
sent me a note mentioning that I was clicking like crazy on a 160m
contest once. Turns out I had never reset the rise time after doing
some testing a few years ago for K9YC on my rig - specifically looking
at occupied bandwidth vs. rise time foot prints. But even in this case,
it is not the fault of the rig maker that I had the rig set up
improperly. It is mine alone.
73/jeff/ac0c
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
www.ac0c.com
On 6/6/20 1:37 PM, donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
That's an excellent step forward Bud. There's no excuse for intentional
key clicks but that's exactly the place where the Japanese manufacturers
have intentionally put us in 2020.
The current generation of Japanese transceivers are making key click
problems much worse than before. Our only hope is that contest
sponsors improve their rules and enforce them against contesters
taking advantage of the fast CW rise time menu options in their radios.
Manufacturers are completely irresponsible with their 4 millisecond
default CW rise times and egregiously irresponsible with menus
options that allow users to select 1 and 2 millisecond rise times.
Kenwood and Yaesu provide completely unacceptable 1 and 2
millisecond rise time menu options and Icom is almost as bad with
their 2 millisecond menu option.
Why are ARRL and the U.S. distributors not communicating with our
Japanese equipment manufacturers about the problems they're causing
and enabling?
73
Frank
W3LPL
----- Original Message -----
From: "cqwpx director" <cqwpx.director@gmail.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 4:58:15 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW Signal Quality Concerns
I have received two (2) actionable complaints of signal quality issues
during WPX CW, which are both under review.
We will investigate additional signal quality concerns. Please provide the
call to be reviewed, along with the date, time and band of the observed
signal quality issue.
73,
Bud Trench, AA3B
Director, CQ WPX Contest
web: <https://cqwpx.com> https://cqwpx.com
email: <mailto:director@cqwpx.com> director@cqwpx.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|