[CQ-Contest] Automation = lost essential skills

[David Siddall]

The requirement is that the 5 elements you list be exchanged.  There is no explicit requirement as to order of conveyance, only an example. We all understand that as a practical matter using the order in the example facilates the exchange and therefore use it. It is to our advantage to do so, this is a timed competition and speed of exchange is paramount.  Correctly or incorrectly, I remember an ARRL contest manager opining that the order is required, but IMHO that opinion has not been incorporated into the rules, nor should it. To borrow from a recent CQWW thread, should an op be DQed for walking a "Sunday driver" through the exchange information without requiring the Sunday drive to perform the difficult task of parrotting back all 5 elements in the requisite order in the same breath? That's the only foolish result that a mandatory element order would accomplish.  Why would anyone want that in Sweepstakes, which seeks to attract participation?

73, Dave K3ZJ


On Nov 21, 2013, at 5:00 PM, RT Clay <rt_clay at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> The callsign requirement is clearly stated in the SS rules, look it up:
> 
> 4. Contest Exchange: The required exchange consists of:
> 
> 
> 4.1. A consecutive serial number;
> 4.2. Precedence;
> 4.3. Your Callsign
> 4.4. Check
> 4.5. ARRL/RAC Section (click here for the official list)
> 
> 
> I also noticed that the rules on the ARRL web page were recently changed to address the issue of operating more than 24 hours:
> 
> 2.4. Scores will be calculated from contacts logged during the first 24 hours of operation.
> Clarification: the intent of this rule is to limit operating time (listening or transmitting) to
> 24 hours. Contacts logged after 24 hours of operation will not be counted toward the
> final score, there is no penalty for including those contacts in a submitted log, and the
> station contacted is eligible to receive credit for the contact.
> 
> As of October 24, 2.4 used to just say (thanks Internet Wayback Machine!):
> 
> 2.4 All entries may operate no more than 24 of the 30 hours.
> 
> Tor
> N4OGW
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ve4xt at mymts.net" <ve4xt at mymts.net>
> To: David Siddall <hhamwv at gmail.com>
> Cc: "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 2:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Automation = lost essential skills
> 
> I remember the lengthy discussion, and IIRC, there was no consensus: namely, that the inclusion of a sample wasn't necessarily an indication that the rules demanded it. 
> 
> However, I like the use of the example and it kinda throws me when an op omits his call (having already sent it), but I do not know of any operators who receive any kind of sanction for same.
> 
> 73, Kelly
> ve4xt
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Nov 21, 2013, at 12:12, "David Siddall" <hhamwv at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Kelly,
>> 
>> You are right in my book too.  But one exception is sweepstakes.  I don't
>> know the rationale, but some years ago the ARRL contest manager ruled that
>> in sweepstakes only discrete complete exchanges are allowed.  This extra
>> requirement doesn't seem to appear explicitly in the current rules (at
>> least that I can find), but I remember a lengthy thread on the subject on
>> this reflector.
>> 
>> Example 1:  NOT PERMITTED even though all required exchange information
>> transmitted & received.
>> 
>> VE4XT:  CQ CQ SS de VE4XT
>> K3ZJ:     K3ZJ
>> VE4XT:   K3ZJ 145 A 66 MB
>> 
>> Example 2: Required exchange necessitates repeating call.
>> 
>> VE4XT:  CQ CQ SS de VE4XT
>> K3ZJ:     K3ZJ
>> VE4XT:   K3ZJ 145 A VE4XT 66 MB
>> 
>> 73, Dave K3ZJ
>> 
>> *-.-. --.-*
>> 
>> *ve4xt at mymts.net <http://mymts.net>* ve4xt at mymts.net
>> <cq-contest%40contesting.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BCQ-Contest%5D%20Automation%20%3D%20lost%20essential%20skills&In-Reply-To=%3CSNT401-EAS3295C25EFCA570A4A15549AFEE10%40phx.gbl%3E>
>> *Wed Nov 20 22:27:59 EST 2013*
>> 
>> That depends. If the receiving station heard the callsign, then the
>> callsign was sent, even if people who came late to the frequency
>> didn't hear it.
>> 
>> An example:
>> 
>> qrz, w1xyz
>> (vy2zm and g3tuc are now listening and know who is on frequency.
>> (IOW, they've heard w1xyz send his call))
>> vy2zm
>> vy2zm 599 05
>> 599 05
>> tu
>> g3tuc
>> g3tuc 599 05
>> 599 14
>> tu
>> k1zz
>> k1zz 599 05
>> CL?
>> w1xyz
>> r w1xyz 599 05
>> 
>> In my book, all three QSOs are legit. Everybody received w1xyz's call.
>> 
>> Am I right?
>> 
>> 73, Kelly
>> ve4xt
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>