[UK-CONTEST] Planning for 2004 ?

[Donald Field]

Who says? I suspect, with a bit of negotiation, HFCC could probably get
access to the database.

73 Don G3XTT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim-M0BEW" <m0bew at blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Planning for 2004 ?


> There's a major problem with using the contest within a contest system.
>
> How would you cross check the logs?
> If the only logs you recieve are from UK operators there will be nothing
> from the rest of the World to check against.
> Without properly checked logs, scores are worth nothing and the contest
> becomes meaningless.
>
> Tim-M0BEW.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Don Beattie" <g3ozf at btinternet.com>
> To: "Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 2:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Planning for 2004 ?
>
>
> >
> >
> > > Chris Tran wrote:
> > >
> > > > My own feeling is that the one-off Jubilee event seemed to attract
> quite
> > > > a good  number of entries, and that an 'RSGB' HF contest (similar to
> > last
> > > > weekend's PACC etc..) would be viable. Whether the Commonwealth
> > > > should be involved is open to debate.
> > >
> > I wonder if there is another way ?  Although the "everyone works the UK"
> > approach is attractive, it has drawbacks. Most significant (as we have
> seen
> > with 7Mhz contest, for example) is lack of support. The contests that
> really
> > fly and make big noise are the big "global" contests (ARRL, CQ, IARU
etc).
> > But one reason that some do not enter these big events is the sheer
> > endurance of a 48 hour contest (yes, I know CQWPX is 36 hours single op,
> and
> > IARU only 24), and the fact that a "modest" G station is up against the
> best
> > in Europe/the world and it's tough to get good placings.
> >
> > So this brings me to the point. Why does HFCC not run a "UK" contest
> within
> > each of these big tests. HFCC could set the ground rules (duration,
power,
> > bands etc) provided these don't conflict with the main contest (e.g.
don't
> > try to use SSB in CQWPX CW !). You could have a 24 hour event in CQWW,
> where
> > the listings are only UK stations. Entries could be optionally earmarked
> to
> > be forwarded from RSGB to the main contest organiser, so that one entry
> puts
> > you into two contest listings ! If it is a requirement that the times of
> a,
> > say, 24 hour contest need to be contiguous, then those who want to enter
> the
> > big contest could take the relevant  24 hours of their log for RSGB
> purposes
> > (there would need to be flexibility on where QSO number starts), and be
> > listed amongst all other UK entrants, and the whole log could go to
> CQ/ARRL
> > as appropriate for that contest.
> >
> > Is this crazy, or could it:
> >
> > a) Generate some real competitive activity volume from the UK inside the
> > envelope of the big contests ?
> > b) Encourage "little pistols" to have a go, and draw them into the big
> world
> > events ?
> > c) Even be saleable to the non-contesters as reducing the total number
of
> > contests ?
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Don, G3BJ
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UK-Contest mailing list
> > UK-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>