[UK-CONTEST] [dmuars] Re: RSGB Sprint

Fri Oct 31 08:02:02 EDT 2008

Like Tim
Agree with something to encourage the M3,s.
 I know they should not feel excluded but are .
Often treated as second class by one of the 80 metre fraternity.
Like it or lump it the M3,s and 2E0s are the future. Many do not come from the traditional SWL route but some are keen to operate, 
At Leicester RS we hope to get some of the M3,s on for the 160 metre Club calls next week.
Please give them encouragement..

Or to put it in simple terms they will operating when  the old groaners are pushing up the daisy,s !

Alex Lister G8FCQ
alexcom22 at btopenworld.com
 07711 411 945 

----- Original Message ----
From: "Raven, Timothy" <tim.raven at capgemini.com>
To: g4fnl at bubloz.demon.co.uk
Cc: dmuars at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 31 October, 2008 11:25:45 AM
Subject: RE: [dmuars] Re: [UK-CONTEST] RSGB Sprint

Graham

I have a couple of suggestions which you might which to consider -:

	* I would like to suggest bring back the 599 bit of the report because the 599 acts as a synchronization signal for the serial number, which I recon operators find helpful especially those who are not too experienced in CW contesting. 

	* Make M3 stations worth double points, as this would help M3 stations to obtain higher score, and it would encourage ‘other stations’ to listen for the weaker signals through the pile ups , because they will get double points, and I might encourage more M3 into contesting. 

Again, like Bob, these are my personal suggestions and are not those of De Montfort University ARS 

73 de Tim G4ARI

From:dmuars at yahoogroups. com [mailto:dmuars@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of g3ory at lineone. net
Sent: 31 October 2008 10:33
To: g4fnl at bubloz. demon.co. uk
Cc: dmuars at yahoogroups. com; don.field at gmail. com
Subject: [dmuars] Re: [UK-CONTEST] RSGB Sprint

Graham,

I welcome your invitation to comment on the series of Sprint Contests 
and I think this is an eminently sensible thing to do with a new 
contest series. Can I ask if you also E-Mailed this invitation to all 
those who sent in logs by E-Mail?

I had previously commented about the QSY rule but at that time 
received no acknowledgement that you had got my comments let alone 
considered them. I will repeat them here:

1. There must be a reason for the two different QSY shifts, 5kHz if 
you wish to call and 2kHz if you call someone else. This reason is not 
self evident to me and I wonder if the added complexity that it 
engenders is worth having a difference. Surely the aim of the rule is 
simply to stop operators 'moving' by 100 Hz and then CQing again and in 
doing so cirumventing the aim of the rule. Why not have a single QSY 
shift for each session?

2. It seems to me that the aim of the QSY rule is to make ops go to 
another 'channel' for their next QSO. Why then is the QSY rule not 
related to the bandwidth of the mode in use? It seems sensible to me 
to have a 2kHz QSY rule for ssb and a 500Hz QSY rule for CW.

3 Finally, is there something that the RSGB CC knows about 80m 
propagation at a time of a sunspot minimum that escapes me? It is not 
obvious to me that we will enjoy good inter G propagation at the time 
of the contest sessions in November. The proof of that will soon be 
known to us all, but the general point that I am making is that the 
sessions should take place at times when good inter G propagation can 
be expected in order to attract a strong following. Trying to persuade 
Russians 1500+km to the east to participate is difficult (aka 80m CC 
February 2008).

This reply is my personal view and does not represent a combined 
return from DMUARS.

73 Bob
G3ORY

>----Original Message----
>From: g4fnl at bubloz. demon.co. uk
>Date: 30/10/2008 18:44 
>To: "UK-Contest" <uk-contest at contesti ng.com>
>Subj: [UK-CONTEST] RSGB Sprint
>
>Guys
>
>The RSGB Contests Committee has recently received some suggestions to 
amend
>the rules and also ideas to potentially increase activity levels for 
the
>Sprint contests, that in these early days, appear not to be 
attracting the
>quantity of entrants that we had anticipated.
>
>As there are just 2 more events before the end of the series, it has 
been
>agreed by the committee that it's sensible to leave the rules as they 
are
>for now, but we are of course keen to improve the situation, and we 
would
>welcome any additional comments and ideas that might be possible to
>implement and include in next years events.
>
>So, please tell us what you like, and what you dislike about the RSGB 
Sprint
>contests, and most importantly, what you suggest that we can do to 
increase
>overall participation? If you have some thoughts, please send an e-
mail
>directly to me.
>
>Thanks Graham G4FNL
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___________ _________ _________ _________ _________
>UK-Contest mailing list
>UK-Contest at contesti ng.com
>http://lists. contesting. com/mailman/ listinfo/ uk-contest
>

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________

Escape to the sun - http://www.tiscali. co.uk/travel/

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________
Capgemini is a trading name used by the Capgemini Group of companies which includes Capgemini UK plc, a company registered in England and Wales (number 943935) whose registered office is at No. 1 Forge End, Woking, Surrey, GU21 6DB __._,_.___ 
Messages in this topic (2) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic 
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members 

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) 
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional 
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe 
Recent ActivityVisit Your Group 
Give Back
Yahoo! for Good
Get inspired
by a good cause.
Y! Toolbar
Get it Free!
easy 1-click access
to your groups.
Yahoo! Groups
Start a group
in 3 easy steps.
Connect with others.
. 
__,_._,___ 