[CCF] Skimmer/Cluster in SAC?

Ilkka Korpela Ilkka.Korpela at Helsinki.fi
Tue Sep 21 21:21:52 PDT 2010

Quoting "Mats Strandberg" <sm6lrr at gmail.com>:


   I write this msg, although it probably only messes up
   things. I have a few Qs. Consider me a "journalist" (PileUP!).

> Hi Ilkka,
> The SAC Contest Committee is needless to say the HF Contest Managers
> of Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. This is a common knowledge that most
> of us have no problem to realize.

   I see "Contest Managers" (Tab) at the sactest.net (with 4 names),
   and I see a signature of "SAC Contest Committee" in the "Home" -Tab
   Under news (2010-Jun-01). Q1 Are these the same?

   Rules mention "Source: OZ5WQ" to me it seems as if he's not actively
   participating in sactest.net. I'd expect him to sign the rules/invitation
   of 2010.  EDR pages had 3 days into the contest
   the announcements only in Danish.

   => Q2 Is sactest.net supported by the four Contest Managers?

   There is no "About" - Tab at sactest.net, where one could find information
   about the people responsible for the great service. Q3 Whom can we thank?

> Of course it would be good if the Contest Committee acts early by adjusting
> the rules to the reality, and find ways for how to co-operate in a timely
> and efficient manner.
> However, my question has nothing of a "semi-official" touch or ambition. It
> was an expression of a feeling that few of the Scandinavian participants in
> SAC has the slightest clue about - namely how skimmer or RBN affects the
> reality for Non-Scandinavian participants in SAC nowadays.
> If we shall only let the SAC CC act or to express concerns, opinions and
> suggestions, then I am sure we will have to wait for a day or two until
> something will happen. If someone has a problem with open dialogue around
> our common contest, then please address that to the four members of the "SAC
> Contest Committee", with a suggestion for them to take the lead in the
> process of keeping SAC up to date. Their silence is a reason for many "semi
> offical" expressions and actions...

  I don't know why they seem to be inactive. Q4 Has the criticism invoked
  it? The "coup" of the Scandinavian participants? Not always do people
  like it when they are openly criticized.

> The rules of today have been in need for at least some small adjustment, due
> to appearance of new technology since the time of the paper-logs.... but not
> even that has been accomplished in the 5 or more years this has been a
> valid issue...

   This a fair argument, I'm only saying that an e-mail reflector
   cannot be used for studying the opinion spectrum of hundreds of
   participants but you can do a pilot..

> So Illka, if you personally can not handle open discussion through TOEC or
> CCF, where actually important subjects are questioned or commented, I would
> suggest that you contact your HF Contest Manager in Finland and ask him to
> act on behalf of you and others that might have the same opinion as you.

   To be honest, I trust my manager 100%. This is how things work.

> I have no ambitions to change any rules of SAC in a "semi official way", but
> to share some of the impressions I have from SAC 2010 CW contest...  If you
> are of the opinion that SAC CC is handling things in the way they should be
> handled - you are of course entitled to this opinion.
> My opinion is that the efficiency of the "SAC Contest Committe"
> definitely has a potential to be improved. One first step is to actually
> start acting as Managers - to cooperate, to develop and to sort out common
> challenges related to SAC issues. If silence and non-activity are keywords,
> then such discussions are created.
> Please Ilkka, I am also keen to know what kind of "elegant treatment of SAC"
> you have seen during the last years. Absence of action - is that called
> "elegant treatment" in your opinion?

   I have seen people actively promoting the contest (Fans), people offering
   their help to the organization, the sactest.net - these come to my mind.

   But I still believe SAC is the contest of the Nordic leagues, and they
   must be actively involved - somehow - in a more positive way than thru
   critisism (which I'm good at and doing now).

   The other option is to let SAC, as we know it, to die (if left non-nurished
   by the leagues), and start "SDR-SAC" or eq.


> SM6LRR, Mats
> 2010/9/21 Ilkka Korpela <Ilkka.Korpela at helsinki.fi>
>> Hi Folks
>> I did more thinking: Why doesn't sactest.net provide
>> a platform, where everyone can send the telemetry from
>> their station?
>> - frequency of the TX
>> - frequency of the RX with the operator on-line
>> - frequency range of the SDRs in use
>> - frequencies of the RX-stations around the world that one listens to
>>  (using some decoder)
>> Then we'd just let the computerized stations to work the contest.
>> Seriously, we are not far from this scenario.
>> Less seriously, who'd care?
>> I guess I would.
>> I don't like these "discussions", and especially when they are
>> "semi-officially"
>> started by SM6LRR, who is not an official member of the SAC contest
>> Committee,
>> that consists of representatives of SRAL, SSA, EDR, and NRRL (and the small
>> ones). I'm again asking, who are the members (I asked this a while back)?
>> I'm more in favor of an approach, in which the Committee asks the
>> participants,
>> e.g. when the results are sent to the participants by e-email, to register
>> and give opinions at a website. That's fair.
>> SAC deserves more elegant treatment.
>> ilkka

Ilkka Korpela

More information about the CCF mailing list