Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

Do you plan to enter the CQ WW DX Contest?
Recent Surveys

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?
2021-10-27

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

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 the CQWW Multi-Two category band-change (8 changes per hour per transmitter) rule be changed to make it a TRUE multi-two? [Please comment if you have an alternative suggestion]
Posted: Jan 03, 2003 (449 votes, 6 comments) by NX5M

Survey Results

Yes. Once a qso is made on a band a station must remain on that band for 10 minutes. 29% (132)

No. Leave it as it is. 35% (159)

I could not care less! 35% (158)

Survey Comments

Rules

I fear that many times rule makers make rules, adjust rules, interpret rules in a way such that it is beneficial for them, their team, their part of the country or world. If rules are to be fair they need to be made/set/and enforced. Who will benefit, who will be hurt by changing the current rule? Those are the one's you'll be hearing from.
Posted by ae9b on January 20, 2003

M2

Yes, as CQWW2002 season showed: m/2 means that you have 3-4 txs on the air same time.
Posted by OH1NOA on January 11, 2003

What is not true about the current rule?

Even with a 10 minute rule, the very competitive stations will have a 3d or 4th station listening for mults, filling up band maps, etc.

In about 4 years, you'll be wondering what to do on 10 meters for 8 minutes after you work both P4s on the band.
Posted by k8mr on January 8, 2003

8-changes/hour is best

Not sure what you're agreeing with George... Tree only said *some* form of band-change limit is necessary - not which one.

8-changes/TX/hour = 16 is not much different than 10-min/change/TX = 12 with regards to total changes.

The current M/S 10min/change rule stinks for two reasons:

1) One often gets stuck on (or even avoids going to) an otherwise unproductive band after finding one new one to work. 2) The 10-min clock starts AFTER a QSO has been made on that new band - this could be after spending MANY minutes on that band tuning around.

Mike N2MG
Posted by N2MG on January 7, 2003

16 band changes an hour.....wow!

I have to agree with Tree on this - there should be a 10 min rule for this catagory.
Posted by k5tr on January 7, 2003

Multi-two = Multi-six

Without some kind of band change rule, the category can really be a unlimited multi-six, with some kind of technology to prevent more than two signals from being transmitted at the same time. It is unfortunate, but you really need to have some kind of rule like this for multi-two.
Posted by n6tr on January 6, 2003

To post a comment, you must be logged in.
If you are not a member, become one now!