Fwd: [PaQSO] Digital Modes

[Stan Reas]

Folks:

I find myself in complete agreement with Hal with regard to the digital modes.

Too often the folks running RTTY do not check to see if a frequency is in 
use before putting out their signal.
And their signals will completely drown out CW activity.

Losing mobile stations like Hal in the PA QSO Party will adversely affect 
the chances of folks getting a "Clean Sweep"

I ran mobile in the PA QSO Party from 1997 through 2003 and enjoyed doing 
so.  I missed 2004 and 2005 due to
family conflicts.

The proposed inclusion of digital modes will definitely affect my decision 
about running mobile in any future PAQP's.  I
find it a waste of time to attempt to compete with RTTY while running 
mobile.  And running a Ten-Tec Scout into Hustler
antennas makes it no fun to attempt to run SSB.

So, I guess like Hal, I doubt that I will participate any longer.  And 
probably will not bother to get into the PAQP from my
home here in Virginia, because most of my contacts from VA have been made 
on 40 Meters.  And I don't have, nor want
to have RTTY capability.

I'd much rather run QRP in the QSO Parties when operating from home.  But 
RTTY operation on 40 Meters will make that
nearly impossible to do.

Unless you have tried to run CW on 40 Meters during contests or QSO Parties 
where digital modes are permitted, you don't
really know how much of the RTTY activity "slides down into the CW portion 
of the band" - and when it does, it makes
operation from low power mobiles or QRP stations nearly impossible.

I think digital modes in the PAQP is a very poor idea.

73, Stan - K4UK

>From: "Hal Offutt" <Hal at japancorporateresearch.com>
>To: "PAQP Reflector" <paqso at mailman.qth.net>
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 10:34:17 +0900
>Subject: [PaQSO] Digital Modes
>
>Hello,
>
>You can't introduce a new mode without having an impact on the existing 
>modes.  This rules change will necessarily reduce activity on both CW and 
>SSB.  If you get 2 points for an RTTY contact on the most important band 
>in the contest (40 meters), 1.5 points for a CW contact and 1 point for an 
>SSB contact, it's clear that there is a big incentive to operate 
>RTTY.  Stations spending time on RTTY will spend fewer hours on CW and 
>SSB.  Even on 80 where CW and RTTY contacts will be of equal value, a good 
>percentage of people who would be on either CW or SSB under the current 
>rules will be operating RTTY, meaning fewer stations to work on CW and SSB.
>
>This change is supposed to ward off the Sunday Doldrums.  It may indeed do 
>this but it will also dilute the current levels of activity and will 
>probably make each individual mode less busy for the entire length of the 
>contest.  Stations nimble enough to operate (and wealthy enough to own) 
>two or three rigs at the same time or to get geared up to make quick 
>changes among three modes and different bands may do very well and rack up 
>big scores.  This sounds like an interesting and fun challenge for an 
>experienced contester, but it may be overwhelming for a lot of newcomers.
>
>I suspect that this rules change might also make the PAQP even more of an 
>intra-state contest than it is today.  When participants can make easy 
>in-state contacts on 80 and 40 using three different modes, they are 
>likely to spend less time on the higher bands.  If this is the case, the 
>recent increases we have seen in 20 meter activity are likely to be 
>reversed as out-of-staters and DX stations find fewer PA stations to 
>work.  Whether this is good or bad depends on your point of view and 
>whether you want the PAQP to be an activity fun for everyone or a contest 
>mostly for PA stations.
>
>AD8J raised an important point about RTTY interferring with CW on 40 
>Meters. The ARRL band plan calls for domestic RTTY operation to take place 
>between 7080 and 7100.  If ops stay in this range, it will not be a 
>problem for CW, but if there is a lot of RTTY activity and stations slide 
>down into the CW portion of the band, CW activity will be completely 
>drowned out.  Since there are already two other RTTY contests on this 
>weekend, I suspect that the band could become very difficult for CW 
>operation (and impossible for mobiles).
>
>As one who enjoys CW and mobile operating, this change will make the PAQP 
>considerably less attractive to me and I doubt that I will participate any 
>longer.  I say this not out of bitterness but merely as a statement of 
>fact. I will miss the old PAQP but I things change and we have to 
>adapt.  I may even enter from Ohio someday if I ever have time to get 
>myself up to speed on RTTY.  Happily for me and other mobile-loving CW 
>ops, several nearby states have resurected their own QSO parties in recent 
>years and these have become mostly CW events that attract 8-10 mobile 
>participants, so I have a lot more alternatives (and a lot more mobile 
>competition) than I used to have.
>
>Good luck with the new rules.
>
>73, Hal W1NN op of W3USA/M (ex K8HVT/M)