[UK-CONTEST] NFD June 2012

Sat May 5 07:48:49 PDT 2012

I'd just like to comment on Ian's very last point. This isn't saying "no Ian, you're wrong" - rather putting an alternative perspective.

One of the criticisms (made by quite a number of people) of the old Restricted section from an antenna point of view was that it was very prescriptive - the feeling was that it constrained you to using a doublet (and it's fairly easy to write rules to adequately define that). Accordingly the CC sought to change the Restricted section antenna rules in such a way as to allow more flexibility and scope for innovation, but without significantly increasing the resources required. Whether that has been achieved is another matter (and further debate on that is probably now better deferred until after experience on this year's NFD). But the point I wanted to make was that in permitting more flexibility, more effort needs to be spent in defining where the limits of that flexibility lies - hence the decision to support the words by a set of diagrams.

73,

Quin G3WRR  

________________________________
From: G3WVG <g3wvg at btinternet.com>
To: "g4fnl.graham at virginmedia.com" <g4fnl.graham at virginmedia.com> 
Cc: "<UK-Contest at contesting.com>" <UK-Contest at contesting.com> 
Sent: Saturday, 5 May 2012, 15:07
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] NFD June 2012

Hi All
I completely agree with all the negative observations re. the late rule changes, nevertheless the G0AAA group has gone ahead and registered for FD!
We've  gone for the open section. We didn't  really want to but under the present revised rules, only the open  section offers scope for real technical advancement.  This year it'll be more of an experimental weekend than a serious entry. No beams. No  towers...oh, and no BBQs either!

>From this  serious competitors point of view the attraction of the restricted section was that the antenna height and type was restricted. This meant that groups with limited manpower and budgets could easily erect simple antennas. In my view, as far as antennas are concerned, the only change needed to the restricted section rules was to increase the height limit to 15 metres. This would have harmonised the rules with SSB FD and also the DARC.
Oh yes another thing.. Any rules which require a set of diagrams to explain them are in my opinion seriously flawed!
73 Ian G3WVG
Please look out for G((?)0AAA/P in CW FD 2012!

Sent from my i-telephone

On 5 May 2012, at 12:57, "G4FNL" <g4fnl.graham at virginmedia.com> wrote:

> I am sorry to say that we too (G4BVH, G3XAQ and me) will NOT be operating as
> G4FNL/P in NFD this year due to the changes in rules for EXACTLY the same
> reasons as John G4IRN has cited. I suspect Olaf G0CKV has also taken the
> same stance for his group....
> Best wishes to those that do take part - and I hope it goes well.
> 73 Graham G4FNL
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:uk-contest-
>> bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Warburton G4IRN
>> Sent: 05 May 2012 11:34
>> To: UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] NFD June 2012
>> 
>> Due to the reasons already documented on this reflector, the 'Radio Ga
>> Ga' team @ G4IRN/p (G0KBL, G0OPB, G4ERW, and G4IRN) will *not* be
>> competing in the RSGB NFD contest this year. However we will be
>> operating that weekend, just for fun.
>> 
>> In the period following the announced changes on 20th March, a
>> considerable amount of money and time was spent preparing for the new
>> rules. Despite the blow of the subsequent rule changes on 12th April,
>> we've decided to carry on working to the 20th March rules, although we
>> aren't able to deploy a 22m mast!
>> 
>> The Contest committee will not be receiving our entry, nor a check log
>> as a protest against:
>> 
>> a) the very late announcement of the first set of rule changes,
>> 
>> b) the audacity of the CC to change them again just a few weeks later.
>> 
>> If anyone wants to join us this year in working to the 20th March
>> rules, please let me know and we can have our own contest 'just for
>> fun'.
>> 
>> If any changes are planned for next year's event, we ask that the CC
>> announce the changes prior to the end of this year, otherwise there
>> will be even less groups participating. Our thinking is that the
>> contest's entire format needs re-thinking in order to cater for the
>> traditional clubs (with their family and BBQ events) and the 'contest-
>> teams' that wish to try out WRTC style contest techniques. Not an easy
>> task and the lack of an over-arching strategy for RSGB contesting makes
>> it all the more difficult. However we do agree with the removal of
>> cluster/RBN/skimmer etc. assistance would like to see this carried
>> forward.
>> 
>> 73 John G4IRN and team.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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