[VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [WSVHF] [VHF] VUAC Seeks Input]

[Rogers, Ron]

This part of the VHF contest rules has been suspect and open to debate for at least 30 years now and I have been VHF-UHF contesting for over 40 years.

Why not get rid of the debate and/or need for further "definition of terms" by simply restricting all operation and point scoring to "the RADIO frequencies" within the approved US amateur bands between 50 MHz and 300 GHz.

Most of us veterans have never seen any practical value toward "advancing the state of the art" by even allowing light wave transmission and detection for the purpose of these contests. 


Ron 
WW8RR

________________________________________
From: vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com [vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Fred Lass [felasstic at yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 8:19 PM
To: Stanford VHF email Remailer; Ev Tupis
Cc: wsvhf at mailman.qth.net; Vhfcontesting Remailer
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [WSVHF] [VHF]       VUAC Seeks Input]

Hi Ev,

I'll volunteer an answer based on my own observations.

The intent of the rule in the first place was to eliminate QSOs with a flashlight and eyes.

The term coherence has been questioned over the use of monochromatic LEDs instead of lasers.

All contestants should operate with the same interpretation of the rules.

There is no right or wrong answer and responses that are not focused (pun intended) are fine.

73,  Fred  K2TR (Hudson Division VUAC)



--- On Thu, 12/3/09, Ev Tupis <w2ev at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Ev Tupis <w2ev at yahoo.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [WSVHF] [VHF] VUAC Seeks Input]
To: "Stanford VHF email Remailer" <VHF at w6yx.stanford.edu>
Cc: wsvhf at mailman.qth.net, "Vhfcontesting Remailer" <VHFcontesting at contesting.com>
Date: Thursday, December 3, 2009, 5:31 AM

As this thread becomes more incoherant (many of us don't belong to all of the lists cc'd, so our replies will be missed)...I keyed in on the actual request, "to determine if the rule should be modified to make it clearer as to the meaning of coherence."

Dear VUCC,
You have the advantage.  We don't know...

... the intent of the rule's presence in the first place.
... the what way(s) in which the meaning of the term being misunderstood
... what problems this causes for you.

As a result, our commentary is "all over the board".  Could you clarify these three points?

Ev, W2EV




_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting




_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting