INFORMATION ON THE CW FIELD DAY QUESTIONNAIRE

The Contest Committee is preparing to rework the CW FD rules for 2013. To assist us with this, we have prepared a questionnaire to allow clubs / contest groups and individual RSGB members to give us their views on a number of CW FD related issues, and these will be taken into account in preparing the new rules. In order to notify as many interested parties as possible, the existence of the questionnaire is being flagged by a number of routes (e-mails to recent CW FD entrants and RSGB Affiliated Societies: and also a posting on the UK CONTEST reflector) - so apologies if you receive more than one notification.

The questionnaire is shown below. This comprises a set of questions, and the simplest means of response is to download the Word file in DOC format (which contains the same text), enter your comments under the questions to which they relate, then return the completed Word document to  Quin Collier G3WRR (the current CW FD adjudicator)  at q.g.collier@btinternet.com . Responses should be made by 5 November -- this is necessary to allow the Contest Committee to achieve its target of a published set of rules by the end of the 2012 calendar year.

A few points:

·      If you are a member of a club / contest group, you are welcome to respond as an individual in addition to the club / contest group’s response

·      As well as telling us what you think, it would be helpful to tell us why that is your opinion

·      Please don’t feel obliged to respond to all questions – just the ones for which you feel you have an input to make

·      Conversely, if there are points you feel are relevant but are not covered by any of the questions, a catchall question is included at the end of the questionnaire. 

The present questionnaire has focussed on CW FD. The Contest Committee is also considering making some changes to other Field Days and is intending to issue a further questionnaire in due course to seek members’ views.

 

 

CW FIELD DAY QUESTIONNAIRE

 

1. Are you replying as an individual or a club/group? It is acceptable to respond (on separate forms please) both as an individual and on behalf of a club/group
2. Please identify yourself or the group on whose behalf you are responding (not essential, but this will help the Contest Committee with analysis)
3. Do you participate in any of the following contests: CW FD / SSB FD / VHF FD?
4. If so, why that one / those ones?
5. If you do not participate in any of those contests (a) the Contest Committee would like to understand why not, and (b) is there anything that the Contest Committee could do to encourage you to participate?

Moving now specifically on to CW FD:

6. The current rules provide a number of sections. The intention is to allow different entrants with a wide range of technological capabilities and resource availability to compete with other entrants on a fairly equable basis by entering the section most closely matched to their capabilities and aspirations. What is your opinion of this approach?
7. Following on from the above question, (a) Do you think the number of sections is about right? (b) Do you think the set of features permitted in each section is about right? If not, please give your view on the optimum number of sections and the nature of each.
8. The Contest Committee is aware that the timing of the issue of a stable set of rules needs much improvement, and is working to a plan to achieve that. Apart from these timing issues, what did you think of the rule changes for 2012?
9. What do you think about the use of RBN (Reverse Beacon network)? Should its use be allowed in some sections and not others? If so, which?
10. What do you think about the use of on-site Skimmer? Should its use be allowed in some sections and not others? If so, which?
11. What do you think about the use of CW readers such as MixW to allow non CW literate operators to participate? Should its use be allowed in some sections and not others? If so, which?
12. What do you think about the use of DX Cluster and similar tools? Should its use be allowed in some sections and not others? If so, which?
13. What do you think of the use of multiple transceivers provided only a single signal is transmitted? Should this be allowed in some sections and not others? If so, which?
14. If you support the use multiple transceivers (see previous question), do you favour allowing full listen through capability (involving use of triplexers etc. as in WRTC) or do you favour the more limited capability (as in the 2012 Restricted and Low Power section rules) in which all receivers had to be muted when any transmitter was transmitting?
15. Should there be a “no holds barred section” with no limits other than those imposed by the licence (eg. 400W, unlimited antenna heights/numbers/types) ?
16. Should there be a “traditional” Restricted section (eg. single antenna, restricted number of masts and height)?
17. Should there be a section like the 2012 Restricted section in which more flexibility of antennas is allowed, within overall constraints on element length and quantity of antenna support? If so what constraints should apply (eg. maximum element length, maximum quantity of antenna support, maximum individual mast height, use of beams)?
18. Would you see a traditional Restricted section (as per Q16) and a “2012 style” Restricted section (as per Q17) as alternatives (ie. there should be one or the other), or would you see them as complementary (ie. there is both a traditional Restricted section and a 2012 style Restricted section, thus providing entrants with an additional choice of section to enter)?
19. Should there be a 10W section? Should this be tied to a 12 hour operating period or should use of 10W and 12 hour operating period be separate choices?
20. What do you think of the suggestion that the rules should be aligned with those of DARC FD (see http://www.darc.de/referate/dx/contest/fd/en/rules/ ) ?
21. What do you think of the current scoring regime? If dissatisfied, what alternative would you suggest?
22. The current rules require that all “radio equipment” (i.e. those items directly required to operate the station) must be moved across the site boundary to ensure that the essence of a portable station is maintained. Differing views have been expressed as to whether the requirement for transportation across the site boundary should also apply to other items, such as sleeping, catering and toilet facilities. What are your views on this?
23. Please provide any further comments dealing with relevant matters that have not been covered above.