IARU HF CW results, N6TV. Change the rules.

Robert A. Wilson n6tv at vnet.IBM.COM
Mon Jul 12 15:49:47 EDT 1993

N6TR already posted my IARU CW score (442,970).  Note than N6TR
did much better than N6TV.  Congratulations Tree.

I just wanted to add that in this contest I had to use only
one receiver because my 2nd rig was broken.  Not fun.  Also,
N6TR was operating with another "unfair" advantage.  Read on.

My final comment on the Sprint rule change (and we should probably cut
off this discussion pretty soon).  So far the argument that most
impressed me was the one about using only your fair share of the radio
spectrum to reduce QRM.

Now, if one maintains that it makes it "better" to ban simultaneous
transmission in the Sprint, then I'll suggest that it would make the
IARU contest better to ban driving more than one antenna at the
same time.

I use one antenna per band because that's all I can fit on my small
suburban lot.  N6TR uses two beams to great affect (especially in the
IARU contest).  Tree drives two amplifiers simultaneously into two
different beams on the same frequency (granted, with total combined
output power not exceeding 1500W), beaming two directions at once.
This is not illegal or against the rules.  Does it cause unnecessary
QRM?  Does it gave him an advantage?  Is it an unfair advantage?  Is
it "immoral?"

Should we change the rules to say "only one transmitting
antenna at a time" in the IARU, Sprint, etc., to level the
playing field?

We can't have it both ways.

Only one signal at a time.  Only one antenna at a time.  Only one
tower.  Only one antenna height.  Only one CW speed.  See, we're on
our way towards equalized contesting!  We should have left things

Bob, N6TV

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list