Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FW: [HSMS/JT] Spring HSMS Contest?

Expand Messages
  • Randy Tipton
    ... the ... went ... and ... was a ... in ... CQ s ... sometimes ... often ... but ... gave ... again. ... who ... give ... simply ... bother ... am ... were
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 5, 2004
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Russ Pillsbury [mailto:k2txb@...]
      > Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:14 AM
      > To: Joe Taylor; HSMS
      > Cc: Randy Tipton
      > Subject: RE: [HSMS/JT] Spring HSMS Contest?
      > Hi Joe and all. Please go back to the spring 2003 rules. Brad makes
      > points very well. During the December rally I tried to operate. I
      > with the idea that I would attempt to work all stations random first
      > then later in the contest work them as assisted if necessary. That
      was a
      > dismal failure as I found very few stations who were really engaging
      > random activity. For 30 minutes I would call CQ and also listen for
      > on
      > 140 (with second receiver) but, you know, it takes quite a while
      > to attract an answer to a MS CQ and even if I got an answer, it was
      > near the end of the 30 minute period. I know it was OK to continue,
      > the
      > answering station did not hear me respond before the half hour and
      > up.
      > This happened several times.
      > Then what? It is now an hour and a half before I can try random
      > So
      > I went on PJ, looking to make skeds with the tougher stations to work,
      > I
      > probably would not get on random anyway. But all of them were busy
      > skedding
      > and working stations that were closer and easy to work. I could have
      > skedded some of the easy ones, but I wanted to work them random...
      > All in all I found the contest format unworkable - unless I wanted to
      > up the idea of random contacts. After a 6 or so hours of this I
      > quit. I think I worked about a half dozen contacts. I didn't even
      > sending in a log.
      > WHAT HAPPENED TO the idea, often expressed here on the HSMS reflector,
      > that
      > we were striving to end the dependence on PJ and other real time
      > scheduling
      > for our contests? It seems the rules have taken a step backwards. I
      > sure some of you well remember the first few contests, back when we
      > using HSCW. There were so few of us on the air back then that a dozen
      > contacts in the contest (which ran for almost 2 weeks) was doing well.
      > With
      > the activity we have today, I think we could eliminate the assisted
      > category
      > altogether and still find a lot more stations to work than back then.
      > Maybe
      > it is not yet time for, or at least people are not yet willing to
      > a
      > totally unassisted contest. But I think we should still be striving
      > toward
      > that goal, not backing away from it as the present rules do.
      > As to the discussion of what constitutes an unassisted QSO, it is
      > NO help of any kind. You find the station ON THE AIR, or he finds you
      > THE AIR. No monitoring PJ to see who is on the band (or worse when
      > are
      > on and where they are pointing). No telephone calls and no skeds
      > those made prior to the contest for distances over the prescribed
      > The only kind of assistance that should be allowed is for stations to
      > announce their CQ frequency and schedule, prior to the contest, on PJ
      > the
      > reflectors.
      > One of the problems with a totally unassisted contest is lack of
      > Going through my logs, I see many times more stations that I have
      > via
      > HSMS than the number who participate in the contests. Why don't these
      > guys
      > get on during the contests? There are bound to be many reasons, but
      > that I have seen given numerous times is that they don't like the
      > mouse rules" (their words, not mine). Another is that using PJ is
      > difficult
      > due to all the extraneous chatter that goes on there. Every time I
      > something like this I get private messages from people who prefer to
      > remain
      > silent, publicly, but who state they have given up, or are about to
      > up
      > on the contests because of the above reasons.
      > Come on guys, let's try to move our segment of this hobby into the
      > mainstream of other amateur contests. The Europeans do not have an
      > assisted
      > category for their HSMS contests, and no other US contest does. The
      > other contest that allows assisted contacts is the 10 Ghz and above
      > cumulative contest. There is a very good reason why it is necessary
      > that contest, but with HSMS on 6 through 222 MHz it is very possible
      > make
      > lots of random contacts. All it needs is persistence and perseverance
      > the contesters. The contest will not be as fast paced, and there will
      > be as many contacts made, but the end result will be much more
      > And we would gain more respect from others who find an assisted
      > class bizarre.
      > 73, Russ K2TXB
      > PS: If someone wants to cross post this to the other reflector on
      > feel free. I tried to join that group twice and still am not joined,
      so I
      > can't do it.
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: hsms-admin@...
      > > Behalf Of Joe Taylor
      > > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 1:02 PM
      > > To: HSMS
      > > Cc: Randy Tipton
      > > Subject: [HSMS/JT] Spring HSMS Contest?
      > >
      > >
      > > Dear Ping Jockeys,
      > >
      > > Spring is just around the corner, and in recent years this has meant
      > > enjoyable activity known as the "North American Meteor Scatter
      > > A few of us (recently WA5UFH, N6ENU and K1JT) have organized these
      > > events, and we're willing to do so again -- but we'd like some help.
      > >
      > > Rules for the Spring 2003 Rally are posted on Tip's web site at
      > > http://www.qsl.net/wa5ufh/Rally/2003eta.htm. Please read these over
      > > then send email to me, with a copy to this reflector, giving your
      > > opinions on whether (and how) the rules might be improved.
      > >
      > > In particular, I draw your attention to the following points:
      > >
      > > 1. Last year, it was felt by many that operating in the unassisted
      > > category was not very fruitful. Most stations were busy making QSOs
      > > arranged on Ping Jockey; few were listening for or replying to CQs
      > > the calling frequency, or for possible tailenders.
      > >
      > > 2. The rules did not make it clear whether "Read Only" access to
      > > Jockey was permissible for Unassisted stations. Some did, some did
      > >
      > > 3. In December 2003 we tried out another system of rules and
      > > the details of which are posted at
      > > http://www.qsl.net/wa5ufh/Rally/nams_Dec_2003.htm. These rules did
      > > with distinct Assisted and Unassisted categories, and instead
      > > both types of QSOs by everyone, with specific rules about what
      > > constitutes a "random" QSO. Do you like these rules better?
      > >
      > > 4. Finally, let me note that the new FSK441 modes in WSJT version
      > > could lead to confusion unless we make specific recommendations
      about a
      > > preferred mode for each band. If you gain experience with these
      > > over the next two weeks, please send us your recommendation for the
      > > "default FSK441 mode" for each band.
      > >
      > > The dates for this year's Rally will probably be 0000 UTC May 1
      > > 0000 UTC May 10.
      > > -- 73, Joe, K1JT
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.