[CQ-Contest] ARRL DX Contest Sent Exchanges

[Rex J Maner]

Quacks.
When I wrote about a station changing Power levals in a contest < I was
not refering to  a station that was going to submit a log,  I've got on
in many test nd worked 50 or 100 QSO's and not sent in a log.  This guy
could change his power leval with every QSO and it is his business.  He
could even send a SN for power leval and it would not be illegal for each
(Serious)   LOG SUBMITING station to log the info recieved .  

K7QQ


CT does allow you to change the sent power in the middle.  The command
TXPWR
brings up a box you enter the transmitter power in.  I made a small log
with
qsos at different power levels and checked the ARRK format log and the
changes
in power were reflected in the log.
73 bruce kd6ww at inreach.com

k8cc wrote:

> A number of people have expressed the opinion that the sent power from
DX
> stations IS WHAT THE STATION IS USING AT THAT MOMENT, and that its OK
to
> change the power level in the contest.
>
> I would like to point out that neither CT, NA, nor I believe, TRLog,
offers
> the capability for DX stations to adjust their sent exchange in the
middle
> of the contest.  With CT and NA your power is set on with the entrant
> information - just because you change your CW message doesn't change
what is
> logged as your sent exchange.
>
> If DX stations would submit logs with sent exchanges FOR EVERY QSO then
the
> practice of changing power every QSO would pose no problems to the
> logchecking process.  Otherwise, if the log shows one power level but
> differing powers were sent, guess what - the guy at the other end is
going
> to get dinged.  This one is inarguable - and entrant sends one thing
then
> claims something else.  Don't blame it on the ARRL, the exchange, or
> whatever.  This entrant blew it.
>
> "Concensus checking", where lost QSOs are reviewed for patterns in the
> received data, can catch some of this.  Writing the rules to discourage
the
> practice will help too (explain why, and people generally will
cooperate).
> Still, this is no reason to screw around with an exchange that has been
> successful for many, many years.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave/K8CC
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com