[UK-CONTEST] SSB Field Day '05

Fri Sep 16 09:04:09 EDT 2005

Hi Nick,

The problem is the additional spotting receiver and antennas are at a 
separate station 150 yards away .. not the same station as the contest 
is being operated from and thats how they worked the rules to their 
advantage.

We have used the public DX cluster in the past and found that it does 
pick up the odd multi but no where near as much as a private cluster 
using a local receive station can, as this is assisted even more by 
checking the live log book and only spotting definite contacts required, 
the public cluster data doesn't do this unless it's linked with the 
modern software, and it doesn't have to stop at a private cluster, so 
long as the rules do not stop all communications to the main station 
except for those on the main operating stations transceiver then the 
possibility of external assistance will be their, it's already been 
shown how software, communications and some initiative can be used to 
achieve this.

I still feel in the restricted section the rules are OK, but we need to 
take away the option for any external assistance, and I think Ian's 
points on allowing 2 Receivers but only 1 antenna is also a very good.

Regards,

Jim

Nick Lewis wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> I'm not sure I entirely agree with you.
>
> I fully agree that complex stations should be outside the scope of the 
> Restricted section, but, as Tom has pointed out, the "one antenna" 
> provision precludes a separate spotting station already. As does rule 
> 2(b) limiting the station to one (trans)receiver.
>
> Personally, I don’t have any problem with public DX cluster use, 
> although our club doesn’t do it. But I don’t think many entrants need 
> be deterred by the cost or complexity of setting up packet access. 
> Even in the Restricted section. I’d rather encourage the use of 
> publicly available amateur packet facilities than discourage it. I 
> don’t think the rules should necessarily level the playing field 
> completely, even in the Restricted section. Where do you stop once you 
> start down that road?
>
> However, I think you’re right when you say that that private cluster 
> use is barred in both sections already. Personally, I think that 
> should apply to any means of communicating with a related off-site 
> spotting station, whether it’s packet radio or any other networking 
> technology. Surely the spirit of the contest is to set up one station 
> on one site? Run a network of any sort between two tents/caravans on 
> the same site, by all means, but not further afield.
>
> My two penn’orth,
>
> Nick
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:uk-contest-
>
>> bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Balls
>
>> Sent: 16 September 2005 07:54
>
>> To: Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com
>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] SSB Field Day '05
>
>>
>
>> I'm not so sure the UK contest activity would support a separate
>
>> section, but I do feel that the restricted section was created for entry
>
>> level competitors or clubs that do not want to spend thousands to
>
>> compete effectively, so running multi station, multi computers with
>
>> wireless LAN etc is way outside the scope of the "entry level".
>
>>
>
>> I feel the contest committee need to do the following.
>
>>
>
>> Bring restricted back to the entry level by removing any external
>
>> assistance, no DX cluster, no external spotting stations to communicate
>
>> in any way.
>
>> This would bring it back to the clubs having limited resources having a
>
>> good chance of getting near the top.
>
>>
>
>> Open section should be as is, only the use of public DX cluster access,
>
>> no private cluster, as it has been since the rules were amened in 2004.
>
>>
>
>> So when are the rules discussed, at the HF Convention?
>
>>
>
>> Jim
>
>>
>
>> rees.a wrote:
>
>>
>
>> >This is an interesting thread, and I have been following
>
>> >with interest.
>
>> >It seems to me that what this is about, is centred on three
>
>> >points:
>
>> >
>
>> >1. Multipliers, how the contest station gets to know about
>
>> >them (callsign, freq etc)
>
>> >2. How these multipliers are passed to the operator of the
>
>> >contest station (assuming SSB Field Day Style operations)
>
>> >3. How fast the relevant band changes / freq changes can
>
>> >occur.
>
>> >
>
>> >I can understand the use of an internal "private cluster".
>
>> >(IE Someone sets up DX Spider (or similar) with a feed from
>
>> >the Public Network,(Internet) as well as a feed from the
>
>> >Private Network (or team spotters, RF Based Packet).
>
>> >Therefore, the spotters are the rest of the world. The
>
>> >"Local" or "Team" spotters, check out the the Public Network
>
>> >Spots, confirm the existance, strength etc (assesing
>
>> >feasibility of contest station to work them) and re-spot on
>
>> >the "Private Network".(Reality is that any checked out spots
>
>> >aren't re transmitted to the public Dx Cluster, thereby
>
>> >proving the existence of this technique, which lets face it,
>
>> >is used in other contests, quite legitemately).
>
>> >
>
>> >Meanwhile, operator of contest station see's spot, spotted
>
>> >twice (once by "public spotter", once by team member,
>
>> >thereby letting the Op know of the feasibility of working
>
>> >the station, ie its a "live one") then using PC Control of
>
>> >Rig / Linear, double clicks spotted Freq, Linear and Rig
>
>> >Re-Tune, Op calls Mult Station, works him, jumps back to
>
>> >original run freq, and carries on.
>
>> >
>
>> >The spotting station could do with a copy of the Op's Log
>
>> >book in front (well summary sheet) so needed mults can be
>
>> >spotted straight away.
>
>> >
>
>> >Of course all of this is done using PC's (as well as some
>
>> >creative interpretation of the rules) and could be
>
>> >replicated using paper (slow) or other network
>
>> >communications techniques, thereby avoiding the use of a
>
>> >"private cluster" (Net Send, for example)in fact, because
>
>> >the rules state "Private Cluster" then using other Computer
>
>> >Communications Techniques can be legitmised....."not using a
>
>> >cluster, Guv!"
>
>> >
>
>> >My own opinion is that an adjustment of the rules is a
>
>> >better way to go. Perhaps even a third Field Day Category ?
>
>> >
>
>> >These would be:
>
>> >
>
>> >Restricted Section: as is.
>
>> >
>
>> >Open Section: as is, but no Assistance whatsoever from
>
>> >Spotting or Cluster Activities, can use a PC to log, but
>
>> >thats it.
>
>> >
>
>> >Open "Plus" Section: No holes barred, use what you want, as
>
>> >long as its within the T&C's of your licence, interpret the
>
>> >rules how you want.
>
>> >
>
>> >The Restricted Section and the Open Section would each also
>
>> >be subject to a 10 minute rule. That is you have to stay on
>
>> >the band for 10 minutes, and show it in the log. (Can anyone
>
>> >explian why the 10 minute rule isn't in place or was removed
>
>> >?)
>
>> >The Open Plus Section would not be covered by this.
>
>> >
>
>> >The Restricted Section and Open Section, would also require
>
>> >site registration, so an invigilator could come along and
>
>> >inspect, at any time during the contest.
>
>> >The Open Plus section would not be covered by this.
>
>> >
>
>> >As a final couple of thoughts;
>
>> >
>
>> >The Restricted and Open Sections, ran like this would
>
>> >encourage operating without the use of "Aids" (DX Cluster
>
>> >etc) and would probably develop skills in propagation and
>
>> >operating, similar to the days before we had DX Clusters.
>
>> >
>
>> >As contesters we have to realise that there are stations,
>
>> >that can put out an impressive signal, build a massive score
>
>> >and justly win. They achieve this by the use of technology,
>
>> >computing and expertise. Maybe its time these dedicated
>
>> >contest stations and teams play on their own pitch, in an
>
>> >"Open Plus" section.
>
>> >
>
>> >Perhaps winners of each section, if they win 3 years on the
>
>> >trot, should retire from that section, for a year or two,
>
>> >and move to the next section up (or down!) as a challenge
>
>> >and an inducement for others to have a go for the top.
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >Adrian Rees (M1LCR)
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >----- Original Message Follows -----
>
>> >From: Jim Balls <jim at j1mbo.f9.co.uk>
>
>> >To: "Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>
>> >Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] SSB Field Day '05
>
>> >Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:50:51 +0100
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >>Not sure Nick, would you class a second station with a
>
>> >>receiver looking for multipliers by checking the live
>
>> >>logbook on a remote PC then sending the information to
>
>> >>the actual operating station as a private cluster, if so
>
>> >>then M0CAM were outside the rules even in the open section
>
>> >>as Rule 4(e) is for all sections in all RSGB contests.
>
>> >>
>
>> >>I still feel the rules are very vague and some
>
>> >>clarification should be made so we are all singing from
>
>> >>the same hymn book, at the moment its very flaky!
>
>> >>
>
>> >>Jim
>
>> >>
>
>> >>Nick Lewis wrote:
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>Hi,
>
>> >>>Isn't it covered by Rule 4(e) in the General Rules,
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>rather than the SSB FD >specific rules:
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>"(e) Simultaneous transmissions on more than one
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>frequency below 30MHz are >not permitted, but in
>
>> >>multi-operator / assisted events use of VHF/UHF to >access
>
>> >>the DX cluster is permitted. Access must be to the public
>
>> >>cluster >network, private clusters are not permitted."
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>I've no idea when the "private cluster" bit was
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>incorporated. >
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>73s
>
>> >>>Nick
>
>> >>>MW0JGE
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>>-----Original Message-----
>
>> >>>>From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>[mailto:uk-contest- >>bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>
>> >>Jim Balls >>Sent: 15 September 2005 09:21
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>To: Uk-Contest at Contesting.Com
>
>> >>>>Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] SSB Field Day '05
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>Hi Dave,
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>Thanks for the reply, I don't see any major changes this
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>year, maybe >>they are due for 2006?
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>As I read them on the Contest Website, the rules are
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>very vague, maybe >>under the restricted section it
>
>> >>should be made more clear that only 1 >>station and 1
>
>> >>antenna may be set up on site within something like a 1/4
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>mile radius, I know with the ease of current
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>communications it could >>still be abused by using a
>
>> >>remote listening station , maybe even a few >>permanent
>
>> >>addresses linking to the contest station via RF but at
>
>> >>least >>it takes away the ability to have a "local" search
>
>> >>station linked by lan >>and operated by the contest team.
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>I can now see how they always managed to get so many
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>more mulitpliers >>over us!
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>Could this be mentioned at the HF Convention, as I guess
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>thats where the >>rules are decided for the contests?
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>Dave Lawley wrote:
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>>Hi Jim
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>I believe that's what they mean by rule changes for
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>this year. The >>>ability to use cluster has been
>
>> >>clarified, ruling out what they did in >>>previous years
>
>> >>which was, at the least, questionable. >>>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>>73, Dave G4BUO
>
>> >>>>>RSGB HF Contests Committee
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>--
>
>> >>>>>This email has been verified as Virus free
>
>> >>>>>Virus Protection and more available at
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>http://www.plus.net >>>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>_______________________________________________
>
>> >>>>UK-Contest mailing list
>
>> >>>>UK-Contest at contesting.com
>
>> >>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>>
>
>> >>>--
>
>> >>>This email has been verified as Virus free
>
>> >>>Virus Protection and more available at
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>http://www.plus.net >
>
>> >>
>
>> >>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>>
>
>> >>_______________________________________________
>
>> >>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
>
>> >--
>
>> >This email has been verified as Virus free
>
>> >Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>> >
>
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
>--
>This email has been verified as Virus free
>Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net
>  
>
>