[UK-CONTEST] UK-Contest Digest, Vol 102, Issue 2

[Andy Cowley]

O> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:20:23 +0000
> From: Ken Eastty<ken.g3lvp at btinternet.com>
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] Fwd: Re: NFD
> To: "uk-contest at contesting.com"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Message-ID:<4DE6AD17.9010009 at btinternet.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The following objection has been sent to the HF CC via Quin:
>
> The members of the G5BK/P NFD team, wish to register a formal and strong
> objection to the decision decision to permit the use of RBN and skimmers
> in the restricted section of HF NFD for the following reasons:
>
> 1.  The very short notice given for, as we see it, the change to the
> rules.  This gives groups not already prepared to use such technology
> (and we believe there will be many) very little time to benefit from the
> change.  This, we argue, is unfair.

This is _NOT_ a change in the rules. It is a clarification of the existing rules.
Packet radio communications are specifically allowed, so external spotting aids
are allowed. Self spotting is banned. So Skimmer and RBN and DX cluster are allowed.

>
> 2.   The means by which the change was promulgated.  We believe that not
> all groups monitor the contest reflector, so there will be some who will
> not have heard about the change.  Again, unfair.

This is _NOT_ a change in the rules. It is a clarification of the existing rules.
Direct e-mail to all registered participants was how this clarification was
advised, not by a contest reflector.

>
> 3.    The change does not fit with the "no second (stand-alone)
> receiver" rule in the Restricted Section.  If we can now use RBN and
> skimmer, why not a second receiver for the latter provides, in general
> terms, much the same function as the former.  A totally inconsistent
> decision, we argue.


This is _NOT_ a change in the rules. It is a clarification of the existing rules.
A second receiver _IS_ allowed in the restricted section as long as it is integrated
into the transceiver - e.g. FT1000 - so no change there.

All your arguments depend on this being a change, which it isn't, so they all fail.

Good luck in the contest.

vy 73

Andy, M1EBV