[UK-CONTEST] CW Letters instead of Numbers

[Andy swiffin]

>
>
>>>> "Donald Field" <g3xtt at lineone.net> 02/06/2004 09:35:38 >>>
>"It doesn't seem right", you say, Andy. But why not? If there could be
any
>confusion with letters, then I can understand. But in WPX all you are
>expecting is a number group, so there can be no ambiguity at all. I'm
just
>surprised your correspondent sent "5nn aetn". I would have expected
"enn
>aetn"! A second saved in a QSO is maybe 2,500 seconds in a contest,
time for
>...
>there!! Trouble is, we Brits worry about whether "it's cricket" or
not. The
>rest of the world just want to win. Thank goodness our rugby team sat
up and

Well, the problem is its a matter of semantics, but I think I could
produce an argument which shows those who use this practice are actually
breaking the rules and should therefore be disqualified:

The contest rules state it is a CW contest, (although for wpx only in
the header with the date).  Other contests such as the RSGB field day
explicitly state: Mode: CW.

The rules also state, for wpx:
"V. Exchange: RS(T) report plus a progressive contact three-digit
serial number starting with 001 for the first contact. (Continue to four
digits if past 999 and five if past 9999.)"

for NFD: "Exchange: RST + Serial number."

Now the grey bit, the mode is described as CW, but does that explicitly
mean that morse code must be used, or can some other code be used?  I
had a browse round, the ARRL, for example,  seem to say it does:

ARRLWeb: Learn Morse Code (CW)!

Now, the ITU maintain the 'standard' for morse code.  If the contest
states the mode as CW does this mandate morse code?  If so ITU standard
morse code must be used, the rules state that the serial number is
digits.  Hence anyone sending letters for the serial number is not using
Morse code, is therefore not using CW, is therefore breaking the rules.

I rest my case M'lord.

>paid attention (oops, not the Scottish rugby team, of course -
sri!!).
Hey..  Bit below the belt old chap...

73
Andy
gm8oeg