[CQ-Contest] ARRL DX Contest Multioperator Station Guidelines

Steve London n2icarrl at gmail.com
Fri Oct 23 17:41:41 EDT 2020

Here's the translation for how this went down....

Some European contesters, who probably aren't ARRL members, really like the idea 
of having IARU-contest HQ-like stations in other contests. They use their 
supposed concern over COVID to push for their goal.

The ARRL PSC, without consulting their own Contest Advisory Committee (CAC), 
agreed to some poorly thought-out guidelines, many of which make no sense.

The ARRL announces this on the day of CQWW SSB, clearly as a slam on the CQ 
Contest Committee (see W7VO's "noting that the CQ committee....").

If the ARRL really gave a damn about COVID, these guidelines would apply 
immediately to all ARRL contests. I'm sure the excuse is that it's too late to 
get it in QST for SS, ARRL 10 or ARRL 160. Since the printed copy of QST no 
longer publishes the rules, but only has a web link to the rules, that's malarkey.

Steve, N2IC

On 10/23/2020 12:47 PM, Michael Ritz wrote:
> The request for this "COVID-19 one-year variance" for the ARRL sponsored contests originated from a group of EU contesters and through the Radiosport department at ARRL HQ. It then went on to the Board's Programs and Services Committee, which approved the temporary change in a meeting held this Wednesday. While noting that the CQ committee has not made any allowances for COVID in their test rules, the motion passed and here we are.
> The rationale: Not every club station in the world has the ability to operate with a bunch of remote operators, the guys in Maine aside!  This gives some of the EU club stations the chance to get on the air under their "normal" club callsign, despite the pandemic, and be part of a MM team.
> I am somewhat prejudiced here, which is why I supported it. I'm one of the believers that radiosport is best when it's done as part of a team effort, especially if you can get some new hams involved as part of the team. (You did read the article in the latest NCJ didn't you?) ;-)
> This is actually similar to what the ARRL did as an allowance for FD this year. There were hams that hated the idea of what we did then, and some that loved it. In any case, overall participation in that event was up over last year, despite the pandemic, and in my books that's a good thing. I'm sure there are critics over this decision also, but so be it. You run with whatever the contest rules are at a particular time, they are subject to change.
> If you want to run MM in the ARRL DX CW test with 15 ops crammed into a single room, have at it. Nothing is going to stop you from still doing that. If you have 15 ops all remoting in from homes all over the globe to a multi-band 5X5X5 stacked array located in Jonesport, Maine, you can still do that too. This provides a third option "for the time being". Whatever floats YOUR boat.
> "Who will enforce this rule?" You guys will. Will somebody figure out a way to game the system? Most likely. There's no big prize money here, and the vast majority of radiosport enthusiasts are honest people. Let's just get on the air, have fun, and get over this damn virus.
> 73;
> Mike
> W7VO
> ARRL Director, NW Division
> Member, ARRL Programs and Services Committee
> (and contester too!)

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list