[CQ-Contest] WARC band contesting is a thing now !

Wed Feb 5 19:16:12 EST 2020

Jim, 

So that I do not misinterpret you….you are then in support of WARC band contesting?

Today VT, tomorrow Maine, next week the New England QSO Party, then the Florida QSO party, then CQWPX (Ok, I know CQ doesn’t do WARC band contesting.)  Let’s add RTTY…..OK, now CW….sure, SSB now…

Where does it end?

It’s just NOT A GOOD IDEA.

Mike VE9AA

Mike, Coreen & Corey

Keswick Ridge, NB

From: jimk8mr at aol.com [mailto:jimk8mr at aol.com] 
Sent: February 5, 2020 7:54 PM
To: ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC band contesting is a thing now !

I don't do FT-*, at least not yet, so I may not be the most qualified person to comment. But my observation is that FT-* sits on a specific frequency, so that adding contest activity to that frequency is not likely to add to congestion for other users of the WARC bands.

My greater concern would be that as is happening the the VHF contests, FT-* activity detracts from the CW/SSB activity. In the case of Vermont, there is so little activity there anyway, that I can't imagine it making any noticeable difference. And for the few who are serious, adding another mode to work those few Vermont people could be a feature, not a bug.

73  -  Jim  K8MR

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca>
To: cq-contest <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wed, Feb 5, 2020 6:27 pm
Subject: [CQ-Contest] WARC band contesting is a thing now !

I guess in the VT QSO party it's a thing.  I sent an email to Mitch, W1SJ to

voice my displeasure/concern.

>From http://www.arrl.org/contest-update-issues?issue=2020-02-05

and http://www.ranv.org/vtqso.html

".CONVERSATION

WARC Contesting?

Perhaps you missed it. I certainly did. In the rules of the 2020 Vermont QSO

Party <http://www.ranv.org/vtqso.html> , is the complete section on how FT4

and FT8 contacts can be made for the VT QSO Party. There are a bunch of

rules related to FTx mode contacts for the VT QSO party listed, including

how the standard exchange of grid square is to be used, and this, rule 6:

"6. FT8/FT4 contacts can be made on the recognized FT8 frequencies of

10.136/10.140, 18.110/18.104 and 24.920/24.919 MHz upper side band. No other

modes are allowed on 30, 17 and 12 meters." 

The potential problem is that the frequencies cited in rule 6 are WARC bands

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WARC_bands> . There's been a gentleman's

agreement among... I guess, "gentlemen," that the WARC bands won't be used

for contesting. Certainly you won't find any ARRL Contests

<http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20-%20General/HFContestingGuidlines_

201411.pdf>  using the WARC bands. CQ Magazine and WWROF sponsored contests

also disallow usage of WARC bands for their events. The verbiage in the ARRL

Contesting Guidelines

<http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20-%20General/HFContestingGuidlines_

201411.pdf>  is the most explicit, stating the rules as well as the

rationale: "WARC bands are not used for contests, therefore moving to these

bands during contest weekends is an option for casual operators and rag

chewers."

Hams are a self-regulating sort, by and large. It would be pretty obvious in

other modes if someone were contesting on the WARC bands, since they might

have the tells of sending "CQ TEST." Or if someone was soliciting a contest

QSO without being obvious about it, they'd be taking their chances in

getting someone that wanted to have a genuine conversation beyond "59" and

their state. That kind of stuff really ruins the rate.

But with the FT modes, the "regular" non-contest exchange is basically the

same as the contest exchange. You really can't tell whether someone calling

CQ from a particular grid is trying to use the band for a contest contact,

or just wants a regular FTx contact.

I've made some FT4 and FT8 contacts both outside of contests and as part of

the WW Digi DX and ARRL RTTY Roundup. Outside of a contest period, I've

decoded people doing directional CQs, probably to work on their WAS

awards...or maybe they just like one of that state's sports teams. But in

the future, I might wonder if another QSO Party changed their rules to allow

contacts on the WARC bands as well.

In my opinion, allowing FTx contacts to count for the VT QSO Party may not

have been thought all the way through. Intended to spur greater

participation, it's not breaking any regulations but runs counter to

worldwide consensus that the WARC bands of 30, 17, and 12 meters should be

contest-free to give non-contesters some breathing room on busy weekends.

This has worked very, very well for more than 30 years. While one of the

smaller state QSO parties will not be too disruptive, there's no reason to

open the door to bigger events that certainly will cause problems.

<snip> N9ADG."

Wow- I don't have words.

-Mike VE9AA

Mike, Coreen & Corey

Keswick Ridge, NB

_______________________________________________

CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest at contesting.com

http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest