[UK-CONTEST] Contest cheats?

[Ray James]

--- On Sat, 13/9/08, Ken Eastty <ken.g3lvp at btinternet.com> wrote:


> I can't believe that anyone would think that making a contest QSO's as the
> result of a 'sked' is within the spirit of contesting particularly when a
> 'chat room' is involved. As far as I'm concerned this is nothing short of
> cheating. I thought the whole point of contesting was to test your operating
> skills and equipment. It seems that some people must be lacking in the first
> instance if they find it necessary to arrange skeds. 

Ken, you're looking at schedules in contests from an HF perspective but even during a HF contest it can take place. In particular but not necessarily by a Multi-Multi or Multi-Single entrant. It is as simple as looking at the PC screen and noting the station you're working is a country or multiplier required on another band and asking them what frequency they're operating on on the needed band, and sending a "talk" message to that effect on your network to advise your team member what to do regarding frequency and callsign.   

Scheduling and "talkback" has always been part of VHF/UHF and Microwaves contesting and is typically carried out only for challenging distances or modes of operation. 
Calling schedule makers cheats or lacking something is not only derogatory but identifies a lack of knowledge of VHF/UHF and Microwave characteristics and modes of operation that deem such practices necessary.
As an example I would like to take the liberty of quoting from one of the most successful VHF and HF contest operators in the UK, Chris Tran, GM3WOJ/ZL1CT

"EME (Moonbounce) contests      These are slowly
becoming more popular, but still attract very few entrants from the UK, for the
simple reason that the equipment and antennas required are still beyond what is
available to the average station. It is reasonably easy for a station on e.g.
144MHz running 400W to a single long-yagi to work one of the major EME stations,
who may be using up to 32 yagis on VHF, or a massive dish antenna on UHF, etc.
The EME contest weekends are publicised well in advance, so you could have a
listen and see if you can hear one of the big stations. 99% of all EME QSOs are
on CW, dodging computer spurii at the bottom end of the bands. Skeds are often
made via the EME nets on 20m, or the K2UYH web-site. A station and antenna
system capable of EME working may not actually be best for VHF/UHF contesting
(because of antenna beamwidth/elevation control etc) but should give very good
results."
 
Since Chris wrote that, K1JT has written the WSJT software and I would say the majority of EME contesters use the JT modes now and schedules and talkback is via either the ON4KST, HB9Q or N0UK chatroom at http://www.chris.org/cgi-bin/jt65emeA


>There also seems to be little doubt that there are those who run 1.5kW or more on
> 2m otherwise why would amplifiers of this power rating be on sale in the UK?
> Someone must be buying them. Looking on the Internet I see that one UK
> amateur is busy building an amplifier capable of 10kW for 2m and even on 4m
> there is at least one station using a pair of 4CX250B's,  I wouldn't be in the least
> surprised if there weren't a few GS35's in use on 4m either.  I believe that a few stations >have high power permits for 2m & above but of course no one ever admits to using more >than 400W during contests, it's a pity that unlike in the 'good old days' today's licensing
> authority no longer carries out station inspections.

> 73 Ken G3LVP

Phew...that's a hot potato and not just for VHF. There's far more HF operation in the UK than VHF and above and with that comes far more HF linear amplifiers capable of exceeding the legal limit by many factors. Nobody on this UK contesting reflector is ever going to admit they or a group they belong to ticks over at a KW or more but everyone bar a small majority have done so and do so on a daily or contest regular basis. It is far easier for the contest committee to go after the ever decreasing number of VHF and above operators perceived to be gaining advantage by the normal VHF and above practice of occasional schedule making than all the masses who are running with an advantage of power over our legal limit from the moment a contest starts until it finishes. Home and island inspections are never going to be easy to carry out and a short invigilator visit can only determine the potential was present to cheat and not that it actually took place whilst
 inspecting.
Possibly having the potential is enough to be disqualified? After all, the banning of VHF schedule arranging by the contest committee maybe had more to do with the perception cheating by off air information exchange could be done, than was actually proven to being done?    

Food for thought!

73 Ray GM4CXM