[UK-CONTEST] SSB Field Day '05

[Andy Summers]

It's me again!

I don't really want to continue arguing with people over this one. As far as
I'm concerned I've made my point adequately and each will draw his/her own
conclusions. I doubt I can change the opinion of those polarised against our
interpretation of the then rules. I'd be surprised though if even they can't
see how we interpreted them that way.

However, there's seems to be some confusion about some aspects of our
operations in 2003 and 2005 that I'd like to try and clear up:

1) The rules were changed for SSBFD 2004 to disallow private DXClusters.
Before that, generalised packet access was permitted.

2) We entered the Open section in 2005 and didn't enter at all in 2004
(partly due to the rule change). For 2005 we used a spotting station
co-located with the run station. We did use our remote (~100m away) spotting
vertical/filter bank that allows us to do in-band spotting. The fact that we
were in the same shack meant we didn't need a private DXCluster. Although
modern logging software allows spots to be added to the band map. Any talk
of our 2005 operations being outside the rules clearly has no merit.

3) The 2003 operation in the Restricted section used a station with ONE
ANTENNA. It was completely isolated from any other hardware and help except
via packet. This was allowed under the rules then in force. The packet
connection was to a DXCluster, whose clients happened to comprise just one
instead of many, and this client chose to have a station in the same field
as our contest operations. As I said before, this needn't have been the
case. It could have been one of our QTH's, and then you would only have seen
one antenna in that field. It was purely for logistical reasons. It could
have been manned by someone who didn't operate the main station at all,
although it was in practice. The reason this is contraversial is that not
everyone can see the spots so generated, not that the spotting station
happened to be in the same field and therefore it appeared as if more than
one antenna was in use. The HFCC decided that it wanted to stop this
activity, labelled it a "private" DXCluster, and brought in a rule change
banning them. Presumably, if they thought our 2003 entry flagrantly abused
the rules they would have disqualified us then. They didn't.

4) I didn't like the way the rules were changed back in 2000 (with no
consultation) and I publicly pointed out what was possible within them. I
think I proved my point. I still think the rules are sub-optimal. I'm not
against rule changes; I'm against changes without consultation or
explanation.

5) Next year we'll be returning to the Restricted section. But we won't be
using a private DXCluster. It's looking like N1MM will work very well with
the Orion operated as 'big-knob man/little knob man'.

I'm not going to say any more on this subject.

73,
Andy, G4KNO.