[CQ-Contest] WRTC Rules

Robert Shohet kq2m at mags.net
Thu Feb 24 21:43:55 EST 2000


I DID understand your post - quite well in fact as well several
responses.  Let's address cost...  what is the cost of a 5 position coax
switch?  About $50.  EVERY contest station I have seen in the US or
abroad has had at least a two or three position switch.  This is not a
hardship or else they would not be at the station.  On the other hand we
are allowed to bring our radio and accessories to Slovenia.  Let's
compare cost again - Icom 781 $4,000?  Ft1000MP $2,300, TS830 $700
(including VFO).

Here economics IS a factor as well as performance.  Not everyone can
afford a '781 nor would choose to buy one.  So in the interests of
"fairness" and testing operator performance it would seem to be FAR MORE
equitable to disallow "high-tech" radio in favor of TS830's.  Wouldn't
that be a BETTER test of skill?  Certainly one six-position antenna
switch has FAR LESS impact on score than a better quality radio, costs a
LOT less  and is readily available.  I am NOT suggesting that we
disallow radio disparities, I AM suggesting the use of an simple antenna
switch for ALL.  I don' t understand either why this should be such a
big deal.  How is using a simple antenna switch taking away from "the
operator" when using a complicated high-tech radio is not?

Perhaps you and 'OJ thought I was talking about complicated electornic
multi-radio band switching that is prevalent at so many "top-ten"
stations?  I was NOT.  I personally switch ALL my antennas, radios,
amps, etc. MANUALLY with 2 and 6-position swtiches.   It adds a LOT of
fatigue and operator error, especially when I am tired, but still serves
me well.  I did NOT and do not advocate this type of antenna switching
for WRTC as it would not be possible to duplicate and clearly
duplication of operating conditions is very important as the WRTC
committee recognizes.

I disagree though with some people's thinking on gadgetry.  The more
"gadgets" you have, then the more "aids" that you have, HOWEVER, the
more potential for operator error, equipment malfunctions and the like,
as well as the increased cost.

My point was that if using an antenna switch is such a big deal and is
seen as taking away from the "operator" function, then we ought to be
consistent and use a "basic" radio without filters to further test the
"operator" function.

Do I advocate this extreme?  NO!  I want to use whatever we are allowed
to use.  I just like "consistency" and convenience, and there is NOTHING
wrong with that.


Bob KQ2M

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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list