[CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion for Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer, new idea

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

Randy,

How about adding a something in the LCR reports if you received an 
excessive bandwidth report or you received 3 reports.  That way the 
station, if they are looking at the LCR's would have a heads up that hey 
someone said my signal was lousy at XXXXX time and maybe they would look 
into it......

Mike W0MU

On 4/13/2015 4:53 PM, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
> I think we all know "excessive bandwidth" when we hear it.  I.e., you can
> hear the splatter or clicks for many Khz before you tune on to the signal.
>
> The CQ WW DX Contest issued a number of warnings for poor signal quality for
> the 2014 contest. We had the first disqualification for poor signal quality
> to a station on CW.
>
> The CQ WW Committee is not omnipotent.  We don't spend hours tuning through
> the SDR recordings looking for bad signals.  We rely on the participants to
> report signals that were causing problems on the band (with call sign, time,
> frequency, and details).  We do follow up on all of these reports.
>
> Not everything reported is objectionable enough to warrant any action.  But,
> it is important that the contest community speak up about signal quality -
> not only to the sponsors but to the offenders as well.  High power and wide
> signals are one of the biggest threats to our enjoyment and to recruitment
> of new contesters into our ranks.
>
> We would be delighted to receive serious proposals for a technical standard
> around signal quality.  It should be something easily measured using an SDR
> recording. Until then, we will continue our function of serving as referees
> that call them like we see them.
>
>
> Randy Thompson, K5ZD
> Director - CQ WW DX Contest
> email: k5zd at cqww.com
> web: www.cqww.com
> Facebook: www.facebook.com/cqwwdx
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Paul O'Kane
>> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 1:53 PM
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Excessive Bandwidth Rule was: Re: Suggestion
>> for Cabrillo -- and the phone skimmer, new idea
>>
>> On 13/04/2015 01:54, brett graham wrote:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Will be interesting to see where in the results these filthy signals I
>>> recorded end up.
>> I suggest that all this talk about excessive bandwidth will remain just
>> so much hot air until and unless contest sponsors define what they mean
>> by "excessive bandwidth" - with parameters such as maximum width at, say,
>> 40db down for both CW and SSB.
>>
>> CQWW was the first major contest to introduce an "excessive bandwidth"
>> rule, backed up (as claimed) by a worldwide network of SDRs and digital
>> recorders
>> - three years ago or so.  However, the rules make no attempt to define
>> excessive bandwidth, and I'm not aware of any penalties having been
>> imposed for this reason alone.  If I'm wrong, I'd be happy to be
>> corrected.
>>
>> 73,
>> Paul EI5DI
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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