[UK-CONTEST] Start & End Times

[Tony G4NBS]

I'm with Bob on this one Paul (having served on VHFCC Eons ago..)

On VHF we give REAL reports and (used to?) accept sometimes it takes a
couple of minutes to complete a QSO.
HF is different - maybe 4 QSO's in a minute without unneccessary information
(such as callsign, QTH and a meaningful report) being exchanged.

So perhaps VHF contesting needs to be treated slightly different to HF when
considering rule changes.

Certainly as a VHF only contester I don't remember being told that I must
only accept 59 or been made aware of the instant cutoff of a QSO at the end.

Like Bob says GJV logged the start of the QSO, but Minos the end - many's
the time I've had to go back and edit the time as I forgot to hit the enter
key...

73
Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Rob Harrison
Sent: 07 June 2012 19:32
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Start & End Times


Hi,

No you are not confused Paul, it should be self evident to all involved that
start and finish times are as per contest, no contacts before or after.

I was just saying that historically on VHF no-one has taken umbrage at
someone completing a QSO that was started before time, and ended up
finishiing after time, within reason. It was never an issue. OK that may now
have changed, and if it has then fine, I've no problem with it.

It's just the way things have occured, like only 59 reports, and not giving
the other callsign in an exchange. That's custom and practice on HF, and
when I'm on HF, not very often, I follow suit.

Just observations, nothing more.

73

Bob G8HGN



----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane at ei5di.com>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Start & End Times


> On 07/06/2012 17:44, Chris G4FZN wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> There's no argument that a QSO must be completed in terms of the "over
>> the
>> air" exchanges before the end time -
>
> The QSO must be completed before the end time.
> There is no need to qualify the word "completed".
>
>
>> but for some it may be a few seconds
>> later when the QSO has been entered onto a pc and the final "return" key
>> pressed - which is when the entry is time stamped (it is in Minos
>> anyway).
>
> Whether the time stamp includes seconds, or just
> minutes, makes no difference.  When, for whatever
> reason, the time recorded for a QSO is later than
> the end time, the QSO is rejected - and it's the
> entrant's problem, regardless of how or why it happened.
>
> This applies equally to time stamps that are simply
> wrong, or those rounded, by the logging software,
> to the nearest minute.
>
>> I think that is where a degree of confusion is creeping in.
>
> Is there any lingering confusion?  :-)
>
>
>
> Now, and with regard to Bob G8WHN's later post
>
> >  and we tend to do things differently than on HF
>
> Is this intended to imply that, on VHF/UHF, words
> in rules have different meanings?  It seems to me
> that end times are independent of frequency.
>
> Or could it be that VHF/UHF contesters are disadvantaged
> in some way, or need concessions that HF contesters
> take in their stride?  Is QSB and noise something
> that happens only on VHF/UHF?
>
> <snip>
>
> > that was 2006, six years ago. Maybe it needs
> > re-affirming.
>
> Why?  Do we really need a new definition of the term
> "end time", or do the VHF/UHF contesters want contests
> to continue for some time after the "end time"?   And
> if so, how much time is enough?  And if someone else
> needs more time than you, is that fair?  Should the
> extra time be mode-dependent, or just operator-ability
> dependent?  Should low power entrants get more time?
> Should entrants in geographically-challenged areas get
> more time?  Should pensioners get more time?
>
> It seems to me that any contest, regardless of frequency,
> is over at the end time, or perhaps I'm the one that's
> confused?  :-)
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> co
>
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> 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


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2433/5048 - Release Date: 06/05/12