[RTTY] 5-Band RTTY WAS

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Bob, 

I don't have an argument against adding single mode versions 
of 5BWAS (although in this day I would argue that it should 
be 9BWAS <G>) if they are added for all three major mode 
groups (CW, SSB, and RTTY/DIGITAL).  I suspect one of the 
reasons the 5BWAS (and 5BDXCC) award is not issued on a per 
mode basis is to avoid the need to produce and stock per mode 
plaques.  

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Chudek - K0RC
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 1:12 PM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: [RTTY] 5-Band RTTY WAS
> 
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Actually, *I* am the one suggesting heresy, not you.
> 
> But before we get started, I thought you, me, Bill, and 
> others should watch this video:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SEVuSZDIcI&feature=related
> 
> 
> 
> {Argument begin}
> 
> The 5-Band WAS CW, Phone, RTTY would only be an addition to 
> the existing WAS Specialty awards being offered. Here's what 
> they say about specialty certificates:
> 
> "Aside from the basic certificate for any combination of 
> bands/modes, specialty certificates are issued for a variety 
> of different bands and modes such as Satellite, 160-meters, 
> SSTV, Digital, Phone, and each VHF band. Available 
> endorsements, for a $7.50 charge, include CW, Novice, QRP, 
> EME, and any single bands. The Digital and Phone awards are 
> available for the various modes. They will be dated, but not 
> numbered."
> 
> So in essence, if I read this right, you can already apply 
> for 5 single band awards. ARRL is processing those cards 
> anyway so I don't see any "extra work" involved. Maybe it's 
> the $7.50 * 5 = $37.50 instead of $7.50 * 1 = $7.50 that is 
> the deterrent to adding 5BWAS CW, Phone, and RTTY? If that's 
> the case, they could adjust the processing fee to compensate 
> for the extra work needed for these achievements.
> 
> The ARRL "rules" need to evolve with the times. When these 
> certificate programs were first created, no one had 
> computers, even the ARRL. Everything was hand processed. So I 
> don't see record keeping/tracking as a huge issue either.
> 
> So... in the context of the video... did you sign up for the 
> basic 5-minute argument or the full 10 sessions?  :-)
> 
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
> 
> 
> 
> ---- PART OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE THREAD ----
> 
> Bob,
> 
> > I think it's time to petition the ARRL again, but this time 
> > for the 5-Band RTTY WAS award. I'll check to see what the 
> > process is and make an attempt to get 5BWAS RTTY as another 
> > award. You suggestions will be appreciated. I have never 
> > attempted anything like this so I've got some learning to do! 
> 
> Not to be a heretic but why should there be a 5BWAS RTTY when 
> the rules say: 
>    "There are no specialty 5 Band awards or endorsements." 
> 
> That means there is no 5BWAS-Phone, 5BWAS-CW or even "5BWAS- 
> standing on your head."  
> 
> You are really asking that the entire 5B WAS award be redesigned 
> to support specialty awards and endorsements.  I do not think that 
> the Awards Committee wants to get into setting rules/criteria for 
> specialty awards or the added burden of specialized card checking 
> and record keeping. 
> 
> 73, 
> 
>    ... Joe, W4TV 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> 
>