[VHFcontesting] Digimodes in VHF/UHF contests? Why not?

[Paul St. John]

Personally, I enjoy PSK31, but I greatly doubt that I'm going to use it while
roving.  But, if fixed stations want to use it between themselves, so be it.

73 - Paul, N6DN

"E. Tupis W2EV" wrote:

> There is no mode restriction cited for any ARRL Sponsored VHF contest,
> other than those invoked by virtue of one's FCC license.  If you think
> you can score well using PSK31, AM, ACSSB, RTTY or Packet
> (non-digipeated) then use it.
>
> Ev, W2EV
>
> KA0TP at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Subj:    Re: [VHFcontesting] Digimodes in VHF/UHF contests?  Why not?
> >
> > In summary, there is debate among the VHF community about the use of
> > Non-traditional modes including digital mades, etc.
> > So the question for the ARRL is what modes are allowed or not allowed?
> >
> > It seems to be the consensus that HSCW and  WSJT are valid modes.
> > But there may be some operators that while they are on the computer, find it
> > too easy to get an "Internet boost."
> >
> > 'Operators who are experienced in HSMS techniques, either HSCW or
> > more recently with WSJT, generally know the rules, follow them
> > carefully, and have been helpfully advising newcomers "don't chat
> > while we run, it will invalidate the QSO", or similar words.'
> >
> > Below are copies of some  emails discussing the situation....
> >
> > In a message dated 9/1/01 5:14:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jomara at erols.com
> > writes:
> >
> > << Subj:     WSJT
> >  Date:  9/1/01 5:14:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> >  From:  jomara at erols.com (Jack O'Mara)
> >  Sender:    owner-vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu
> >  To:    hsms at qth.net, meteor-scatter at qth.net, vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu
> >
> >  The W4IY contest group are thinking of trying the WSJT mode
> >  in the September contest. The thought was to use  144.145
> >  instead of tying up the calling freq. The timing would be
> >  0700Z to 1100Z on Sunday Sept. 9th. We would add our grid
> >  square between the two reports after our call.
> >
> >  Does anyone have any thoughts on this pro or con or other
> >  suggestions. We would like to hear them.
> >
> >  73
> >  Jack W4AD
> >   >>
> >
> > Subj:    Re: [VHFcontesting] Sept Contest
> > Date:   9/2/01 7:32:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time
> > From:   k1whs at worldpath.net (DAVID C. OLEAN)
> > Sender: vhfcontesting-admin at contesting.com
> > Reply-to:   <A HREF="mailto:k1whs at worldpath.net">k1whs at worldpath.net</A>
> > To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com (VHF Contest Reflector)
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >     The genesis for my original post was the WSJT  mode, which apparently, is
> > a step up from the normal high speed meteor scatter. Essentially all of the
> > detection is done by the computer. The operator sits there and reads the copy.
> > I guess it is like rtty in that respect. It is very effective, but I think
> > about the League vs Peter Laakman, WB6IOM and G3LTF (I think) and their non
> > allowed 1296 eme QSO. (In the late 60s or early 70's) They did much more
> > receiving than a WSJT operator. I was just curious about what folks thought.
> > Hey, I'm game to try anything if it is legal and proper.  I will get to
> > playing with WSJT soon too. but I would agree that, in pursuing all the grids
> > thru "automated" modes such as WSJT, the more traditional microphone or CW
> > contacts would suffer.  I have shied away from HSMS because the operator does
> > not have to copy in "real time".  Heck, that eliminates the adrenaline flow
> > when that big meteor blows by and you fall out of the chair!
> >     When I was a kid, my first 144 signal heard was a weak and whispery am
> > signal. I was holding onto a limb up in the apple tree in my yard. My other
> > arm was holding onto a small super regen transceiver I had built and finally
> > got working.  Straining to hear that signal got me going in ham radio. I guess
> > I love the medium that is between the two antennas at either end of the
> > circuit. I love the mystery. I love to hear the fading. I like those hollow
> > sounds, and always wonder about how it sounds that way sometimes.  This is the
> > reason ham radio attracts me. I, as you, worry that such days may be numbered!
> > Soon we may all be watching computer screens and disconnected from the medium
> > that we love.  Gosh, progress is a two edged sword!
> >     I would opt for a separate contest for the automated modes. Of course, the
> > downside is that there are too many contests now!  Maybe there is another
> > answer. I just hate to see activity fall any more than it has now!
> >
> > Dave Olean  K1WHS
> >
> > Dave Pascoe KM3T wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > At a basic level - having the human ear used for detection of the
> > > > signals makes sense.  The day might be coming where technology could
> > > > replace the human ear with enough performance to make the human
> > > > detection method non competitive...  I for one would not welcome that
> > > > day as I think it would remove most of the fun and make the results
> > > > less dependent on operator skill, but rather how well you can program
> > > > your DSP.  I feel the basic thing that makes ham radio interesting
> > > > compared to just sending e-mail is putting on your headphones and
> > > > listening.
> > >
> > > I'm familiar with HSCW and WSJT but have personally not operated either
> > > mode.  I look forward to trying both, from a technical and fun
> > > perspective.  But, for contesting, I fall in the camp who believes using
> > > the human ear for detection ought to be the way to go.  I know that there
> > > will be some doom-and-gloomers who will come out and say that the only way
> > > to get new people interested in doing VHF contesting will be to allow
> > > these modes.  Well, that may be true, but it's pretty unlikely.  There are
> > > plenty of ways to recruit without having to depend overly much on whizbang
> > > technology.
> > >
> > > I certainly could see a separate, short contest (like a HSCW or WSJT
> > > Sprint) which could be fun and allow interested folks to compete.  But I
> > > would not want to see the existing VHF contests changed.  One of the
> > > problems I could see is a substantial shift to these modes, caused by the
> > > natural competitive desire to work more grids, which could take activity
> > > away from the more traditional modes, making those not inclined to use the
> > > new modes lose interest due to decling activity.  We do have to do
> > > something to increase contest activity, but I'm not sure these new modes
> > > is the best route to that goal.
> > >
> > > 73,
> > > Dave KM3T
> > >____________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> > Subj:    Re: [VHFcontesting] Digimodes in VHF/UHF contests? Why not?
> > Date:   9/3/01 1:22:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> > From:   joe at puppsr13.princeton.edu (Joe Taylor)
> > Sender: vhfcontesting-admin at contesting.com
> > To: k1whs at worldpath.net
> > CC: vhfcontesting at contesting.com (VHF Contest Reflector)
> >
> > Dave --
> >
> > Many thanks for your follow-up message.  I did not take any of
> > your original comments as being unreasonable; it is, indeed,
> > interesting to know what the ARRL might think about the use of a
> > new mode in League-sponsored VHF contests.  And it's useful to
> > have some discussion of it on reflectors such as this one, too --
> > since to a very considerable extent the "League opinion" is and
> > should be a reflection of the views of us all!
> >
> > Rule 3.10 in the "General Rules for All ARRL Contests" reads as
> > follows:
> >
> > "The use of non-Amateur Radio means of communication (for
> > example, Internet or telephone) to solicit a contact (or
> > contacts) during the contest period is not permitted."
> >
> > To me, that means you must make your skeds before the contest
> > starts, or perhaps via ham radio on another band during the
> > contest.  Seems clear enough.
> >
> > Rule 2.1.3 in "General Rules for ARRL Contests on Bands above 50
> > MHz" states that for Single Operator stations, "Use of spotting
> > assistance or nets (operating arrangements involving other
> > individuals, DX-alerting nets, packet, etc.) is not permitted."
> >
> > Once again: whatever skeds, etc., you want to make, using the
> > internet, do it before the contest -- and disconnect yourself
> > from the net when the contest begins!
> >
> > As for so-called QSOs in which *any* of the required information
> > for a QSO is exchanged or hinted at on a chat page, etc., during
> > the contact, forget it.  That's no QSO!
> >
> > Operators who are experienced in HSMS techniques, either HSCW or
> > more recently with WSJT, generally know the rules, follow them
> > carefully, and have been helpfully advising newcomers "don't chat
> > while we run, it will invalidate the QSO", or similar words.
> >
> > As for your shack with few amenities: with the above rules in
> > mind, WSJT should work just fine for you during contests.  We've
> > done HSCW from the PackRats June VHF QSO Party mountaintop
> > location, and I expect we'll use WSJT next June.  Of course we
> > have no internet there.  Without really trying very hard, we've
> > worked 4-5 extra 2m grids that way in each of the last couple of
> > years, using the wee hours of the morning when other activity is
> > minimal.  With WSJT, that number could easily be doubled, or
> > tripled, because QSOs can often be completed in 15 minutes
> > instead of taking half an hour or more.
> >
> > Finally, about the possibillity of "the whole bottom of the 144
> > band being filled with blips and burps and see[ing] ssb and cw
> > activity drop even more at the same time."  That would not be
> > good, I agree. The Europeans, with their higher population
> > density and higher levels of VHF activity, have I believe more or
> > less decided on a band plan that would put WSJT use up around
> > 144.370.  This does not seem unreasonable to me for North
> > America, as well, although heavy use of 144.100 through 144.150
> > for WSJT over the past couple of months has caused almost no
> > problems, as far as I am aware.  That, of course, has been under
> > non-contest conditions.
> >
> > See you on the air next weekend!
> >
> >                 -- 73, Joe, K1JT
> >
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: WSJT
> > Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 20:10:52 -0400
> > From: "Jack O'Mara" <jomara at erols.com>
> > To: hsms at qth.net, meteor-scatter at qth.net, vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu
> >
> > The W4IY contest group are thinking of trying the WSJT mode
> > in the September contest. The thought was to use  144.145
> > instead of tying up the calling freq. The timing would be
> > 0700Z to 1100Z on Sunday Sept. 9th. We would add our grid
> > square between the two reports after our call.
> >
> > Does anyone have any thoughts on this pro or con or other
> > suggestions. We would like to hear them.
> >
> > 73
> > Jack W4AD
> > ------
> > Submissions:                    vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu
> > Subscription/removal requests:  vhf-request at w6yx.stanford.edu
> > Human list administrator:       vhf-approval at w6yx.stanford.edu
> ------
> Submissions:                    vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu
> Subscription/removal requests:  vhf-request at w6yx.stanford.edu
> Human list administrator:       vhf-approval at w6yx.stanford.edu