eHam Logo

Community
 Home
 eHam.net Home
 Articles & Stories
 Contesting Wiki
 Speakout
 Strays
 Survey
 My Profile

Resources
 This Week's Contests
 Classified Ads
 Contest Links
 Product Reviews



Contest Lists
 3830
 CQ-Contest
 CT-User
 NA-User
 SD-User
 TRLog
 VHFcontesting
 WriteLog

Other Lists
 Amps
 AntennaWare
 Propagation
 RFI
 RTTY
 TenTec
 TopBand
 TowerTalk
 Yaesu

 Mailing List FAQs


Site Information
 About This Site
 Contesting.com Team

Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

Recently the RDXC committee reclassified P3F to high power from low power without publicly providing strong evidence that any infraction had occurred. They concluded was that the contestant was running HP on 80/40m but not full-time, just 10 minutes here and there without any convincing evidence. It appears they used the RBN as their source of information. Should the RXDC contest have to publicly provide convincing evidence before reclassifying a station from LP to HP?

Recent Surveys

Randy, K5ZD, wrote a sidebar titled " Convergence and Change" in the 2015 CQWW CW printed results in CQ magazine. He wrote that the "convergence of personal computers, Internet access, DX clusters, and CW Skimmer have changed the nature of CW contesting". He goes to say that it is "more difficult to police the line between the single operator working alone and those who are using the assistance of DX spotting." In light of this convergence and change is it time to recombine SO and SOA into a single category?
2016-05-28


What's your primary Software for HF Contests ? ( no VHF/UHF ! )
2015-07-17


Are you ready the this year's winter contest season
2015-07-05


What ways have you found to be effective to attract newcomers to our hobby?
2015-04-28


What is your linear?
2015-02-09


View All Survey Questions

Have a good idea for a Contesting Online Survey question?
Enter your idea!


Thanks for voting! Your vote has been included in the results below.

Should digital modes that make "impossible" QSOs happen on VHF/UHF be encouraged during contests?
  Posted: Jun 25, 2002   (419 votes, 10 comments) by n6tr

Survey Results
Yes - let's embrace new technology. 63% (264)
They should be used only by multi-op stations. 1% (3)
No - I think human ears shoud be required. 36% (152)

Survey Comments
Digi modes for contesting
Yes embrace the new technology.
And review the contest rules and scoriing method. A level playing field is a very hard thing to find.

Posted by G1GYC on November 10, 2002

WSJT et all
I think to be fair the digital mode QSO should take no longer to complete than a "Normal" SSB meteor sked... 30 minutes.
That embraces new technology and removes abuses of it... like the guy who time averages a weak signal contact over 2 days. To me that would be a meaningless contact.

Posted by k7xc on July 20, 2002

Ban Electronics from ham radio
Yes, all this whiz bang digital stuff is really moving ham radio too far from it's roots. I think no QSOs should be allowed that use anything higher tech than a coherer as a detector....Really though, of course all modes and tricks for extracting a signal should be allowed. In contests where specific modes or equipment are the name of the game then all entrants should stay within the rules. Like no SSB QSOs in CW contests, no PSK31 QSOs in CW contests, no DSP in a vintage rig QSO partys, unless the rules of the contest allow for different catagory entrys. Ham radio has always been about finding ways to communicate better with radio, and should continue to be. Using a new method is only cheating if it is against the rules.

Posted by n6kb on July 6, 2002

Au natural???
Maybe we should really level the playing field and disallow the use of electronic receiving apparatus altogether.
Hey, it would make keeping score alot easier.

On a serious note, the digital modes will open up a whole new part of ham radio to our deaf brothers and sisters who desire to experience the agonies and ecstasies of contesting.

Posted by K8MP on July 6, 2002

New Modes---
Yes, Since this hobby is a leader in embracing new technology, and development to further Amateur Radio,The more modes the better. Let's not forget that CW is a Digital mode. As avid DXers, and Contesters, when the solar cycle drops off, many will turn to the U/VHF bands to keep their skills honed, as I found U/VHF contesting in the early 90's. Not all have large amounts of property, and aluminum. The new modes in use on U/VHF have brought the
once unreachable to a reality. My best DX (some, may not call it DX) on 144MHz, via Meteor Scattor is 2057KM using FSK441, 100W, 12 Ele at 20Ft with Fixed elevation, and Very marginal Rocks. Remember that a contest allows one to use the tools and skills they have aquired, to obtain the desired results.

73

Posted by W3SE on July 3, 2002

Impossible?
The question isn't written so as to imply anything against DSP. It clearly implies the use of "digital modes" that some believe are superior to SSB/CW. My question is: Since we keep hearing that some of the new "digital modes" are superior to CW and can work with signals that aren't even audible, can some of you folks who are competent and proficient in the use of cw verify that this is in fact the case, or not? I have inquired on this subject to no avail and I suspect its not true although I suspect that it seems apparent and true to the less proficient cw ops.

Posted by wa4dou on July 2, 2002

Go for it
I don't really see the difference between digital techniques and things like crystal filters and directional antennas. All of them are located within the confines anyone would call "your shack", they serve to enhance the "signal-to-noise" and they don't use artificial inputs from other hams (like packet). Hell, you might even learn something like DSP really DOES work.

Posted by N2MG on July 1, 2002

Impossible qso's?
If by "impossible qsos" you mean weak signal work using DSP hardware/software to enhance and perhaps even machine copy those signals then, sure why not. We are a technology based hobby after all.

Posted by N8VW on June 27, 2002

Convergence - Again
Just like the use of Internet based spots during contest all digital techniques should be encourage in contesting. In fact anything that contributes to the tighter integration of digital and analogy technologies in contesting should be promoted. Hopefully this would promote the development of more novel convergence technologies in amateur radio as a whole. Personally, I believe that as more of us older contest types are SK the younger contest generation will actively encourage this sort of integration without giving it second thoughts.

Posted by VE5ZX on June 27, 2002

Impossible?
I think we're starting with a possibly faulty premise here? Exactly what "impossible" QSO's are you referring to?Is this some more of the "outperforms cw" stuff we keep hearing about some of the digital modes? If so, it has yet to be established to my satisfaction that such can occur. Skilled cw ops can hear and discern signals that lesser ops claim aren't even there. I'd like to hear some elaboration on this.

Posted by wa4dou on June 26, 2002

To post a comment, you must be logged in.

If you are not a member, become one now!