[CQ-Contest] Field Day SO2R

[K5WA]

Frank,
 
It is very interesting that you didn’t have any issues with the meat of my statement to Jim which is that the rule is idiotic in that it stifles innovation and is badly written.  You even give tacit support to my theory that this rule was initiated to target a VERY small (about 1) participant pool by bringing in your citation to support my argument.  The actual year it was implemented is irrelevant if my theory is correct for its reason of being instituted.  I actually went and looked at the 1970 rules and they are different (slightly) than the currently published rules in regard to simultaneous transmission.  There is no simultaneous transmission in SO2R (which is what Jim was asking) as you well know so if this rule should continue, it needs to be worded better. In the meantime, my advice to Jim (go 2A) was sound based on the spirit of the rule even though the rule is flawed.
 
FD isn’t a contest anyway.  ;-)
 
73,
 
Bob
 
From: donovanf at starpower.net [mailto:donovanf at starpower.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 1:51 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Cc: K5WA
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Field Day SO2R
 
"A couple of years ago, someone put an idiotic rule into FD which says no
"octopus" can be used at FD"
 
A little fact checking is in order...
 
That rule has been in place for at least forty five years! See the rules for the 
1970 Field Day.  The rule was put in place because of the use of octupuses 
by at least one entrant in the 1A category.
 
http://www.arrl.org/arrl-periodicals-archive-search
 
73
Frank
W3LPL
  _____  

From: "K5WA" <K5WA at Comcast.net>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 3:21:25 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Field Day SO2R

Jim,
 
A couple of years ago, someone put an idiotic rule into FD which says no
"octopus" can be used at FD.  This had to be a politically motivated rule
which kills some aspects of innovation at FD (which is an event FOR
innovation at multiple levels) and was probably targeted at one cross-town
rival of the rule writer.  So, if you follow that vaguely written, poorly
worded "rule" for this non-contest, you would have to go 2A to comply.  Now,
if you just happen to have a fast antenna switch that doesn't say "Octopus"
or "Simulcaster" on the side of it, then SO2R your little self away.  ;-)
 
Line 4 in the ARRL FD rules.
 
The use of switching systems that allow for lockouts in order to use
multiple transmitters (i.e., an "octopus") in an attempt to enter a
lower-number-of-transmitters class are prohibited (i.e. using 2 transmitters
that can transmit simultaneously, with two operators, and a lock-out system
and entering class 1A). The use of simulcasting devices which allow a single
operator to key and transmit on more than one transmitter at a time, is
prohibited.
 
Have fun at FD.  We'll see you as K5TU this year if the Texas floods and 105
degree heat doesn't get us.
 
Bob K5WA
 
 
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:06:36 -0700
From: Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Field Day SO2R
Message-ID: <557F5A7C.80502 at audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
 
A small group of us have been doing FD QRP 1A Battery for several years, and
I've recently considered doing it SO2R. The question is, does SO2R put me in
1A or 2A if there's only a single operator and software insures that one one
radio can transmit at the same time?
 
73, Jim K9YC
 
 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest