[UK-CONTEST] cqwwwpx

[Tom GM4FDM]

Isnt there a 500m rule for antennas?


Tom
GM4FDM



On 30/05/2011 15:25, Bob Henderson wrote:
> The idea is that both stations keep their respective frequencies busy by
> interleaving their Qs such that this situation doesn't really arise.  In a
> multi-op station there will typically be two operators on a band, each with
> his own transceiver but both interlocked to prevent the 2 x signal
> infringement.  I understand that two operators well practised in this
> particular technique can reliably achieve 140% individual run rate.  So each
> station is doing 70% rate of a top flight operator i.e hitting 100 -
> 150Q/hr.  Essentially when one transmits the other receives and vice versa.
> Both frequencies stay pretty busy. :-)
>
> This frequency busy but apparently unoccupied phenomena is mostly associated
> with SO2R stations where a single operator is QRV on two frequencies.
>
> Incidentally, I am aware of four operators each with their own transceiver
> and antennas having been deployed on a single band.  Two running interleaved
> piles and two sweeping for mults.  Only one carrier transmitted at any one
> time to keep inside the rules of course.
>
> Terrain is key to this kind of game, as each stations antennas should be out
> of sight of the others on the same band.  Lots of dosh helps too.
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN
>
>
>
> On 30 May 2011 13:22, Rob Harrison<robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> First off let me say I don't operate on HF. But I understand what is going
>> on technically.
>>
>> However what happens when another station finds what he thinks is a clear
>> freaquency only to be told the frequency is occupied by the said station who
>> is actually on a different frequency, .i.e. how does the said station keep
>> two active frequencies when only transmitting on one, and if he does,
>> doesn't that infringe the rules?
>>
>> Bob G8HGN
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Henderson"<bob.5b4agn at gmail.com>
>> To: "Callum McC"<callum at mccormick.uk.com>
>> Cc: "UK Contest Reflector"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 1:46 PM
>>
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] cqwwwpx
>>
>>
>>
>>> Exactly Callum.
>>>
>>> The sponsors are the arbiters and so far they've considered it to be
>>> within
>>> the rules.  BUT as G3SXW suggests; things may be about to change.  At
>>> least
>>> wrt CQWW.
>>>
>>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>
>>> On 30 May 2011 12:24, Callum McC<callum at mccormick.uk.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>   >>>  Whether it was within the spirit of the contest or not
>>>> The rules of the game are to win, within the rules. That's the spirit.
>>>>
>>>> You are either within the rules - or not.
>>>>
>>>> C.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> ______________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
> http://www.netintelligence.com/email
>
>