[CQ-Contest] Ideas for WRTC 2004

[KL7RA]

>>         Here are a few thoughts for the 2004 sponsor assuming 
>> someone steps up to the plate.  First, repeat the Finns' excellent 
>> idea of identical antennas over flat terrain at the same height within 
>> a limited geographic area, but remove antenna interaction and local 
>> line noise problems from the equation.
>> 
>>         How to do this?
>> 
>> 1.  Locate 50 stations along a remote flat seacoast a set distance
>> from high tide levels every mile along a 50 mile stretch of isolated 
>> beach.  

Or small ships at sea spaced out over some distance, but the cost would
be too much.

I had a great time working the OJ's and found they would pick my call out
very quickly. Conditions here in Alaska were excellent, best I have heard
in years which is odd for July. All the OJ stations usually had the same 
signal strength but I also noticed some would have a huge pile and others
not, strange.

Now that's it's over and the contest world has to agree that Dan and Jeff are
indeed  the best, I have some questions about the rules the Finns used. Maybe 
they could explain to me and the next possible WRTC rule's committee their
logic or thinking.

-- CW and SSB count the same points and no additional multiplier for a second
band mode QSO.
   This rule prevents any advantage for a  team with equal skills in both modes. 
A team that can do both modes well should be rewarded but this rule says 
that a SSB team only can also compete. Is this what we want?
 
-- Radio A only makes the QSO. 
-- Op B can't make QSOs.
-- Op A can not touch radio B
   This rule prevents any advantage for a team that can work well together. Two 
ops that can read each other's mind and can operate as a team should be 
rewarded, but these rules clearly take that away. I assume these rules were
to prevent the "long time together" teams from swamping the playing field, 
but again, is this what we want? 

73 Rich KL7RA