RE: [wsjtgroup] New modes for RH ??
Bruce, I agree with you, FSK441 this week during the Random Hour to allow time for everyone to discover there is a new mode out.
After everyone becomes familiar with the FSK441C & FSK441B I think we should consider changing to them.
If we swap too soon, some may not know what is happening when there FSK441A does not decode and pings
Having said that, I encourage everyone to provide Joe with feedback of their experiences with the new version / modes.
Bruce good luck in the mobile / rover I will be looking for your pings Saturday & Sunday.
- I like the way the December 2003 North American Meteor Scatter Contest rules
were setup. I think that making the rules the same for Spring 2004 Contest
would be good. I always hope for more random qso's.
- I agree with Jon - the December contest rules were excellent. Only wish more
stations would try to work randoms during the designated windows.
Jon W0AMT <w0amt@...> said:
> I like the way the December 2003 North American Meteor Scatter Contest rules
> were setup. I think that making the rules the same for Spring 2004 Contest
> would be good. I always hope for more random qso's.
> 73, Jon
- Joe and all:
First, thanks for the sponsorship of and the spiffy certificate I received
for my activity in the Dec. 2003 event. It graces the shack wall as I type
this. Your request for comments re: the 2004 rules has reminded me of my
experiences during the recent event. My comments follow:
For my part, the Dec. 2003 rules were acceptable -- save for the 'random
QSO' rule - which, in my view, is fatally flawed, towit:
"Random QSOs. . .must originate during the random windows."
Huh? OK...what's a 'random window?' Back to the Rules. Here 'tis:
"The first 30 minutes of each even-numbered UTC hour (00, 02, 04, .) are
designated as "Random
Windows" in which non-scheduled QSOs are strongly encouraged. . ."
There were several occasions during the December event when I could have
easily tail-ended stations completing skeds and added to my score, the
scores of other entrants -- and the overall event activity, but, the clock
wasn't in agreement. The time was not ' . . .the first 30 minutes of an
even number UTC hour.' Too bad! No random QSO's allowed! Now, the only
reason to work these folks was to add to my contest score. All of the
stations I heard were old friends whom I've worked, in most cases, many
times. Translation: I don't need the grid, state, or country. If I could
not work them and add their points and multipliers to my contest score, the
alternative - in the absence of a sked (or 'net assistance) during the
'QSO's disallowed' hours - was to turn the rig off and go do something else.
That is exactly what I did.
Why should random QSO's, for the purpose of scoring, only be allowed during
the first half of even numbered hours? What logical thought process led to
that conclusion? If I hear K2TXB working K9KNW (as the result of a sked, or
not -- no matter to me!) and I choose to tail end Russ, why should it matter
what time it is? Should I run a timer on the receive attenuator so 30 dB of
signal degradation is kicked in and I hear him less well at 31 minutes past
the even numbered hours - or, just shut the rig off, as I did in December?
This is, to my recollection, the only radio operating event that I've ever
known of that actually *discouraged* event activity. I believe this is a
self defeating point. If the Dec. 2003 rules stand, I suggest the wording
of the definition of 'Random Windows' be reworked to eliminate the 'strongly
encouraged' language, in favor of, ". . .all times outside of 'Random
Windows' are those times during which non-scheduled QSO's are strongly
If the intended purpose of this rule was to make random QSO's easier for
newbies, I applaud the effort, if not the result. If y'all wish to
encourage the 'random window' concept, publish as many times, frequencies,
and tail-ending schemes as the 'net and your ISP will allow. Please,
however, do not discourage contest activity simply based upon an arbitrarily
arrived at timing standard.
73, Brad, W9FX