[UK-CONTEST] UK-Contest Digest, Vol 74, Issue 45
Bob Henderson
bob at 5b4agn.net
Tue Feb 24 01:17:12 EST 2009
Tony
Our amateur radio competitive activities map extraordinarily well to
competitive activities in other walks of life. Competitive activities
have rules. Competitors who exploit their tools & talents most
effectively within the rules do best. This applies equally well to any
competitive activity.
If you turn up with a push bike to an event allowing 1000cc motor bikes,
why should you expect to do well against them? Why should you be fed up
when you don't? If you turn up with a 1000cc motor bike to an event
restricted to push bikes you should expect not to be allowed to enter.
In an event which allows both push bikes and 1000cc motor bikes, it
would be a foolish competitor with a push bike who allowed himself to be
upset that he didn't beat those with 1000cc motor bikes. Wouldn't a
wiser man compare his performance against others using push bikes?
Ultimately we all have the option to go away and do something else
rather than pursue an endeavour we don't enjoy. We are fortunate to
enjoy such freedom.
I don't see much in shades of grey. Most of life's issues manifest in
full colour here. Perhaps you might be wise to expand your view of
contesting, your participation in it and your ability to compete. Unless
you do you are likely doomed to frustration.
There has never been a level playing field and nor will there be. There
are quite simply too may variables. Successful contesters are those who
enjoy contesting. The key to enjoying contesting is the determination
of metrics for measurement of your performance and improvement in it.
If you commit yourself to a push bike in a race providing for
participation of 1000cc motor bikes, you will be doomed to eternal
frustration & disappointment if your only metric for success is that you
finish first. Of course it would take someone with a rather
monochromatic view of life to fall for that. Wouldn't it?
Events will never have categories ideally mapped to the capability of
all entrants stations. It is up to individual entrants to decide how
far to go in mapping station capabilities to event categories.
I've been involved with contesting for over 40 years. It took me very
little time to become comfortable competing against others more talented
or better equipped than me. Had I not done so, I would have been unable
to enjoy the pursuit AND it would be unlikely I'd still be involved 40
years later. That contesting is so popular suggests many others have
learnt this trick.
Time perhaps?
Bob, 5B4AGN
Tony roskilly wrote:
> Bob 5B4AGN wrote:
> Questions like this crop up from time to time and I always find them
> puzzling.
>
> Hi Bob and all,
>
> Why should such questions be puzzling?
>
> Unlike many competitive activities contests in this hobby have many many
> participants rather than small numbers of elite participants observed by
> masses of passive onlookers. It is quite acceptable in sport for Man U to
> play Chelsea, you would not expect Littletown Rovers to do
> well if matched against one of them on the same pitch.
> .
> Any mapping of Amateur radio contesting to other activities can only hold so
> much credence, perhaps a better
> analogy would be that "we" many ride push bikes and get fed up with others
> turning up on 1000cc motor bikes.
>
> I do get most disheartened by attitudes like "if you don't like it then go
> away and do something else", I'm not suggesting Bob
> is expressing this at all, it is however the attitude expressed by several
> leading figures in Amateur radio to me on the 'phone.
> This kind of attitude is depressing to those who really care about our
> hobby and not just with "winning", I only wish the powers
> that be would extend consideration to the great multitude of radio amateurs
> out there. Well done to those who can set up
> superb stations, I would dearly (expensively) love to join them, but not in
> competition against the average UK station who is
> often situated in an urban area with few options for aerials but who wants
> to participate in our hobby.
>
> It is an issue with our hobby that many participants have what I term the
> "binary" attitude of many engineers, there's black
> there's white, and I'm not programmed to consider grey. it is inherent in a
> technical hobby. There are many honourable
> exceptions to this rule but it can be a problem when trying to widen the
> discussion to try and help those less able to compete.
>
> I am concerned for the mass of those who by no fault of their own try hard
> but will never get anywhere unless some sort of
> regard is given to leveling the playing field. Perhaps it is too much to
> expect that very creditable scores made by excellent
> operators with limited stations (I know many in this category) are not
> given any credit, its just the big boys who are feted.
>
> It is in the very nature of competition that not everyone can win, and I
> detest the "you've got to be given a certificate for turning up" attitude,
> but for the vast majority of competitors to know they have no chance
> whatsoever is not a good thing for encouraging participation.
>
> Anyway, I guess I'm on the losing end here as few out there who "count"
> want to listen, I often have many responses off reflector from folks who
> wholeheartedly agree with my views but are not willing to go public, I've
> nothing to lose so what the hell.
>
> Vy 73
> Tony G3ZRJ
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: <uk-contest-request at contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 11:56 AM
> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: UK-Contest Digest, Vol 74, Issue 45
>
>
>> Send UK-Contest mailing list submissions to
>> uk-contest at contesting.com
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> uk-contest-request at contesting.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> uk-contest-owner at contesting.com
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of UK-Contest digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Quest for QRO (g3ory at lineone.net)
>> 2. Re: Quest for QRO (Bob Henderson)
>> 3. FW: Quest for QRO (Ian Trusson)
>> 4. What is contest competiton for? (Tony Roskilly)
>> 5. Re: What is contest competiton for? (Bob Henderson)
>> 6. Re: What is contest competiton for? (Peter Bowyer)
>> 7. Re: What is contest competiton for? (Tom Wylie)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:35:32 +0100 (GMT+01:00)
>> From: "g3ory at lineone.net" <g3ory at lineone.net>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Quest for QRO
>> To: <pokane at ei5di.com>, <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Message-ID: <11183910.1235396132190.JavaMail.root at ps27>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> The licensed power in the olden days (when amateurs could only be
>> 'trusted' to have tolerably accurate dc instrumentation) was a bit of a
>> mish mash. The CW rules were clear - 150W dc input which was likely to
>> result in 100W rf output. At the same time 100% high level amplitude
>> modulation was permitted. Under these conditions the total rf power
>> output rises to 150W from the 100W previously. Hence the old rules were
>> not consistent in terms of RF power output, more pragmatic. Remember
>> those big old modulators and the 'rule of thumb' that they had to
>> produce half of the power that the RF PA produced under carrier only
>> conditions. The reason of course was that this power went into the rf
>> output (remember the aerial RF ammeter kicks upwards when you yell into
>> the mic of an AM transmitter).
>>
>> Then along comes a new method of modulation in which only the peak
>> power can sensibly be defined since pretty much everything else is
>> dependent on the nature of the modulating signal. This made it
>> sensible to redefine the method of power measurement since peak
>> envelope power was a viable method of measurement for both AM and SSB.
>> The pep output for a 100W carrier high level modulated is 400W (as we
>> have already seen). Hence a unified method of power output measurement
>> was introduced which was the same irrespective of whether the mode was
>> CW, AM or SSB. The highest level previously licensed was chosen and
>> this of course is 400W pep.
>>
>> 73
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>> ----Original Message----
>>> From: pokane at ei5di.com
>>> Date: 23/02/2009 12:18
>>> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>>> Subj: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Quest for QRO
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Ian White GM3SEK" <gm3sek at ifwtech.co.uk>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 100W of carrier with 100% high-level AM equates exactly to 400W
>>>>
>> PEP.
>>
>>>> The person to thank for getting that right - and making sure RSGB
>>>> and the licensing authority got it right too - was G2DAF.
>>>>
>>> I'm impresssed, but that is far from the full story.
>>>
>>> What I would like to know is why, exactly, did the permitted
>>> power on CW change overnight from 100w PEP (nominally equivalent
>>> to 150w DC input on CW) to 400w PEP?
>>>
>>> After all, it was not considered to be a general increase in
>>> power. Therefore, it must be related to the change in definition
>>> of power. Therefore, someone was conned, and it wasn't the
>>> amateurs - we were laughing all the way to our linear amps :-)
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Paul EI5DI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What's on TV tonight? - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/tv
>> __________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:52:57 +0000
>> From: Bob Henderson <bob at 5b4agn.net>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Quest for QRO
>> To: "uk-contest at contesting.com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Message-ID: <49A2AA39.6080205 at 5b4agn.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Paul O'Kane wrote:
>>
>>> What I would like to know is why, exactly, did the permitted power on
>>> CW change overnight from 100w PEP (nominally equivalent to 150w DC
>>> input on CW) to 400w PEP?
>>>
>>>
>> Simply because the determination of power level switched from DC input
>> to RF output, it having been established that power at the peak of the
>> modulation envelope was what mattered. Anything other than 400W CW
>> would have required a licence in which power by mode was specified.
>> Just think of the work load. Every time a new mode emerged a power
>> limit for it would need to be determined.
>>
>> This would have been a complete administrative nightmare as well as a
>> technological nonsense. It had already been established that power at
>> the peak of the modulation envelope was what mattered.
>>
>> Thank goodness a clear thinker was there to see good sense prevail.
>>
>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:02:57 -0000
>> From: "Ian Trusson" <ian.trusson at ntlworld.com>
>> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] FW: Quest for QRO
>> To: "UK Contest e-group" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Message-ID: <2642087B45FD4D5FA0C50096C69798AB at Ian>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>>
>>
>> The increase in CW output power from 100W to 400W (6dB) for CW operators
>> in
>> effect compensated them for the increase from 25W per AM sideband to 400W
>> SSB (12dB) which the phone operators benefited from.
>>
>> The phone operators got 6dB more benefit from the change, but they were
>> changing to a more efficient mode so I guess it was fair that they should
>> have received more benefit.
>>
>> If CW had been kept at 100W I think that would have been very
>> unreasonable,
>> reducing the intrinsic advantage of CW over phone. Having the same power
>> limit for both modes made more sense. I think they got it right!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ian, G3RVM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:11:01 -0000
>> From: "Tony Roskilly" <g3zrj.morsekey at btinternet.com>
>> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] What is contest competiton for?
>> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Message-ID: <79E217F3DF394C9BB42657D75090DB0C at SallytonePC>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi All,
>> have been sitting here reading the last few days of submissions.
>>
>> I want to ask a simple question:
>>
>> 1) What is that basis for competition in contests in the UK?
>>
>> (please note I say in the UK because I hope that RSGB and the amateur
>> community in these islands can and should demonstrate a high standard to
>> the rest of the world).
>>
>> a) Is it meant to encourage operators to improve their skill levels and
>> demonstrate this by the excellent ops getting top billings in the results
>> tables thereby allowing a pool of real talent to show itself for both
>> national and international contests.
>>
>> b) Is it a chance for the "mines' bigger than yours" brigade to show off
>> how much much more potent their signal is?
>>
>> These two categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive however, the
>> b) group seem to be becoming more and more to the fore in this country.
>>
>> I fully concur with the proposition that contesting is a real incentive
>> for operators to hone their skills on the air and to make their stations
>> as effective as possible, many lessons have been learned in the technical
>> field over the years because of folks wanting to squeeze the last drop of
>> RF performance on TX and RX out from what is allowed. Once the "gloves
>> come off" and anything goes, the two main reasons for contesting go out of
>> the window (sorry for the mixed metaphores there).
>>
>> Buying huge towers and using commerically made beams, rigs linear amps etc
>> is one easy route to contest success, but where really is the increase in
>> genuine technical knowledge here? I know and respect one leading UK
>> contester who is well able to make up his own gear and sort out most tech
>> problems while still sticking by the rules in RSGB contests however, I
>> think operators like him are becoming the exception.
>>
>> As regards honing skills, what skill is there really in "winning" an RSGB
>> contest just because you have aerials and power way beyond those of the
>> average chap? It is sickening for many "normal" stations to realise that
>> no matter how hard they try and improve their stations and hone their
>> operating skills they will be left in the exhaust fumes of the 4 X 4
>> driving brigade every time they hit the contest road. Being "cannon
>> fodder" for the big stations is not encouraging, life ain't fair, but UK
>> contesting should offer as even a playing field as possible so that folks
>> can see their scores rising with their skill levels with some hope of
>> winning, not just being sidelined.
>>
>> Perhaps, just perhaps, the economic black hole caused by the Me Me Me
>> brigade might reflect on the attitudes in Amateur Radio, its all the same
>> basic ethos, I want and to hell with you.
>>
>> Having had 20 kW TXs and rhombic farms at my disposal in my commerical
>> radio days means I know just how easy it is to work around the world with
>> high power and big antennas and had I been able to use these on the
>> Amateur bands I would have taken no pleasure in having "beaten" others
>> because the victory would have been totally hollow. Let the Eastern
>> Europeans etc boast of "winning" with 10 - 20 kW etc etc, hopefully we can
>> retain some degree of civilisation and regard for the common good in the
>> UK.
>>
>> 73
>> Tony G3ZRJ
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:46:34 +0000
>> From: Bob Henderson <bob at 5b4agn.net>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What is contest competiton for?
>> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
>> Message-ID: <49A2B6CA.6020802 at 5b4agn.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> Questions like this crop up from time to time and I always find them
>> puzzling.
>>
>> I don't think the basis underlying contesting in the UK is any different
>> to that anywhere else in the world.
>>
>> Amateur radio contests are competitive events. Each contest has a set of
>> rules associated with it. These set out the constraints applied to the
>> activities of entrants which augment those imposed under their operating
>> licence and the broader law.
>>
>> Entrants are encouraged to use their operating talents and their station
>> design and building skills to best address the challenges of their
>> chosen event and entry category.
>>
>> Entrants whose activities fall outside the rules risk disqualification.
>>
>> To do well in overall contest rankings requires both good operating
>> skill AND a competitive station.
>>
>> Neither a 1st class operator with an uncompetitive station nor a poor
>> operator with a world class station should reasonably expect to do well.
>> Would Chris Hoy expect an Olympic Gold if he rode a Raleigh Caprice?
>> Should I, if Chris Hoy lends me his bike?
>>
>> Those who quickly become disillusioned when they don't win outright,
>> need to adjust their horizons. Above all else, contesting is about
>> having fun developing ones own skills.
>>
>> ?0.02 from me.
>>
>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>
>> Tony Roskilly wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> have been sitting here reading the last few days of submissions.
>>>
>>> I want to ask a simple question:
>>>
>>> 1) What is that basis for competition in contests in the UK?
>>>
>>> (please note I say in the UK because I hope that RSGB and the amateur
>>> community in these islands can and should demonstrate a high standard to
>>> the rest of the world).
>>>
>>> a) Is it meant to encourage operators to improve their skill levels and
>>> demonstrate this by the excellent ops getting top billings in the results
>>> tables thereby allowing a pool of real talent to show itself for both
>>> national and international contests.
>>>
>>> b) Is it a chance for the "mines' bigger than yours" brigade to show off
>>> how much much more potent their signal is?
>>>
>>> These two categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive however, the
>>> b) group seem to be becoming more and more to the fore in this country.
>>>
>>> I fully concur with the proposition that contesting is a real incentive
>>> for operators to hone their skills on the air and to make their stations
>>> as effective as possible, many lessons have been learned in the
>>> technical field over the years because of folks wanting to squeeze the
>>> last drop of RF performance on TX and RX out from what is allowed.
>>> Once the "gloves come off" and anything goes, the two main reasons for
>>> contesting go out of the window (sorry for the mixed metaphores there).
>>>
>>> Buying huge towers and using commerically made beams, rigs linear amps
>>> etc is one easy route to contest success, but where really is the
>>> increase in genuine technical knowledge here? I know and respect one
>>> leading UK contester who is well able to make up his own gear and sort
>>> out most tech problems while still sticking by the rules in RSGB contests
>>> however, I think operators like him are becoming the exception.
>>>
>>> As regards honing skills, what skill is there really in "winning" an
>>> RSGB contest just because you have aerials and power way beyond those of
>>> the average chap? It is sickening for many "normal" stations to realise
>>> that no matter how hard they try and improve their stations and hone
>>> their operating skills they will be left in the exhaust fumes of the 4 X
>>> 4 driving brigade every time they hit the contest road. Being "cannon
>>> fodder" for the big stations is not encouraging, life ain't fair, but UK
>>> contesting should offer as even a playing field as possible so that folks
>>> can see their scores rising with their skill levels with some hope of
>>> winning, not just being sidelined.
>>>
>>> Perhaps, just perhaps, the economic black hole caused by the Me Me Me
>>> brigade might reflect on the attitudes in Amateur Radio, its all the same
>>> basic ethos, I want and to hell with you.
>>>
>>> Having had 20 kW TXs and rhombic farms at my disposal in my commerical
>>> radio days means I know just how easy it is to work around the world with
>>> high power and big antennas and had I been able to use these on the
>>> Amateur bands I would have taken no pleasure in having "beaten" others
>>> because the victory would have been totally hollow. Let the Eastern
>>> Europeans etc boast of "winning" with 10 - 20 kW etc etc, hopefully we
>>> can retain some degree of civilisation and regard for the common good in
>>> the UK.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Tony G3ZRJ
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:47:48 +0000
>> From: Peter Bowyer <peter at bowyer.org>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What is contest competiton for?
>> To: "uk-contest at contesting.com" <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Message-ID:
>> <56152ae90902230647j92fa2fekc23c8c3afa3102f4 at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> 2009/2/23 Tony Roskilly <g3zrj.morsekey at btinternet.com>:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> have been sitting here reading the last few days of submissions.
>>>
>>> I want to ask a simple question:
>>>
>>> 1) What is that basis for competition in contests in the UK?
>>>
>>> (please note I say in the UK because I hope that RSGB and the amateur
>>> community in these islands can and should demonstrate a high standard to
>>> the rest of the world).
>>>
>>> a) Is it meant to encourage operators to improve their skill levels and
>>> demonstrate this by the excellent ops getting top billings in the results
>>> tables thereby allowing a pool of real talent to show itself for both
>>> national and international contests.
>>>
>>> b) Is it a chance for the "mines' bigger than yours" brigade to show off
>>> how much much more potent their signal is?
>>>
>>> These two categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive however, the
>>> b) group seem to be becoming more and more to the fore in this country.
>>>
>> The growing success of the power-limited 80m CC events, and the
>> further increasing popularity of the QRP section in those events,
>> suggests otherwise.
>>
>> There are plenty of international opportunities for the big guns to
>> compete with other big guns and compare the sizes of their weapons.
>> Meanwhile, the RSGB is doing just what you[re suggesting by promoting
>> new contests which are aimed squarely at, and supported by, the rest
>> of us, along with introducing innovative new log submission and
>> adjudication systems which turn round results in world-record times
>> and keep us all interested.
>>
>> Peter G4MJS
>>
>> --
>> Peter Bowyer
>> Email: peter at bowyer.org
>> Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:55:46 +0000
>> From: Tom Wylie <t.wylie at ntlworld.com>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] What is contest competiton for?
>> Cc: uk-contest at contesting.com
>> Message-ID: <49A2B8F2.9030909 at ntlworld.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> I wonder how many people have even been disqualified for a rules
>> violation?
>>
>> On a couple of occasions I have written to contest organisers
>> complaining about either poor signals or poor operating practise
>> including the use of profane language. I offered tape recordings. I
>> have never had any response. I've never had the enthusiasm to follow
>> it up mind you.
>>
>> Ham radio contesting apart from National Field Day is a self regulating
>> sport (Do they still do station inspections for NFD - I used to do them
>> but haven't been asked for years)....
>>
>> It is nigh impossible to verify rule violations except perahps frequency
>> violations. How many operators join the QRP section but run 100w or
>> more? How many station run excessive power?
>>
>> I remember adjudication the 40m CW contest and had an entry from a QRP
>> station who had a better score than the top restricted station - running
>> 2 QSOs per minute on 5 watts for the duration of the Contest? How do
>> you prove otherwise?
>>
>> 73 de Tom
>> GM4FDM
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> Questions like this crop up from time to time and I always find them
>>> puzzling.
>>>
>>> I don't think the basis underlying contesting in the UK is any different
>>> to that anywhere else in the world.
>>>
>>> Amateur radio contests are competitive events. Each contest has a set of
>>> rules associated with it. These set out the constraints applied to the
>>> activities of entrants which augment those imposed under their operating
>>> licence and the broader law.
>>>
>>> Entrants are encouraged to use their operating talents and their station
>>> design and building skills to best address the challenges of their
>>> chosen event and entry category.
>>>
>>> Entrants whose activities fall outside the rules risk disqualification.
>>>
>>> To do well in overall contest rankings requires both good operating
>>> skill AND a competitive station.
>>>
>>> Neither a 1st class operator with an uncompetitive station nor a poor
>>> operator with a world class station should reasonably expect to do well.
>>> Would Chris Hoy expect an Olympic Gold if he rode a Raleigh Caprice?
>>> Should I, if Chris Hoy lends me his bike?
>>>
>>> Those who quickly become disillusioned when they don't win outright,
>>> need to adjust their horizons. Above all else, contesting is about
>>> having fun developing ones own skills.
>>>
>>> ?0.02 from me.
>>>
>>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>
>>> Tony Roskilly wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> have been sitting here reading the last few days of submissions.
>>>>
>>>> I want to ask a simple question:
>>>>
>>>> 1) What is that basis for competition in contests in the UK?
>>>>
>>>> (please note I say in the UK because I hope that RSGB and the amateur
>>>> community in these islands can and should demonstrate a high standard to
>>>> the rest of the world).
>>>>
>>>> a) Is it meant to encourage operators to improve their skill levels and
>>>> demonstrate this by the excellent ops getting top billings in the
>>>> results tables thereby allowing a pool of real talent to show itself for
>>>> both national and international contests.
>>>>
>>>> b) Is it a chance for the "mines' bigger than yours" brigade to show off
>>>> how much much more potent their signal is?
>>>>
>>>> These two categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive however,
>>>> the b) group seem to be becoming more and more to the fore in this
>>>> country.
>>>>
>>>> I fully concur with the proposition that contesting is a real incentive
>>>> for operators to hone their skills on the air and to make their stations
>>>> as effective as possible, many lessons have been learned in the
>>>> technical field over the years because of folks wanting to squeeze the
>>>> last drop of RF performance on TX and RX out from what is allowed.
>>>> Once the "gloves come off" and anything goes, the two main reasons for
>>>> contesting go out of the window (sorry for the mixed metaphores there).
>>>>
>>>> Buying huge towers and using commerically made beams, rigs linear amps
>>>> etc is one easy route to contest success, but where really is the
>>>> increase in genuine technical knowledge here? I know and respect one
>>>> leading UK contester who is well able to make up his own gear and sort
>>>> out most tech problems while still sticking by the rules in RSGB
>>>> contests however, I think operators like him are becoming the exception.
>>>>
>>>> As regards honing skills, what skill is there really in "winning" an
>>>> RSGB contest just because you have aerials and power way beyond those of
>>>> the average chap? It is sickening for many "normal" stations to
>>>> realise that no matter how hard they try and improve their stations and
>>>> hone their operating skills they will be left in the exhaust fumes of
>>>> the 4 X 4 driving brigade every time they hit the contest road. Being
>>>> "cannon fodder" for the big stations is not encouraging, life ain't
>>>> fair, but UK contesting should offer as even a playing field as possible
>>>> so that folks can see their scores rising with their skill levels with
>>>> some hope of winning, not just being sidelined.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps, just perhaps, the economic black hole caused by the Me Me Me
>>>> brigade might reflect on the attitudes in Amateur Radio, its all the
>>>> same basic ethos, I want and to hell with you.
>>>>
>>>> Having had 20 kW TXs and rhombic farms at my disposal in my commerical
>>>> radio days means I know just how easy it is to work around the world
>>>> with high power and big antennas and had I been able to use these on the
>>>> Amateur bands I would have taken no pleasure in having "beaten" others
>>>> because the victory would have been totally hollow. Let the Eastern
>>>> Europeans etc boast of "winning" with 10 - 20 kW etc etc, hopefully we
>>>> can retain some degree of civilisation and regard for the common good in
>>>> the UK.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Tony G3ZRJ
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
>>> Virus Database (VPS): 090223-0, 23/02/2009
>>> Tested on: 23/02/2009 14:47:17
>>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Men are like fine wine. They start out
>> as grapes, and it's up to women
>> to stomp the crap out of them until
>> they turn into something acceptable
>> to have dinner with!
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
>> Virus Database (VPS): 090223-0, 23/02/2009
>> Tested on: 23/02/2009 14:55:48
>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>>
>> End of UK-Contest Digest, Vol 74, Issue 45
>> ******************************************
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
>
More information about the UK-Contest
mailing list