Excellent condensation of what we were saying Greg, not to mention the
additional concept of a net control getting extra points, as well as the
need for training.
Now--in a normal emergency net, a net control is pre-designated (I think).
How do you think we could do that for FD while still being in the spirit of
"practice for the real thing"? I have no good answer.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Greg D <ko6th.greg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Tossing in my $.02 here, for what it's worth... TL:DR: it's not the
> rules, it the training that we need to fix.
> From this chair, the issue isn't so much about the points as about getting
> the most number of successful contacts through during the 24hr FD window.
> The premise of the single-QSO rule for FM birds is that the single channel
> is a scarce resource, and we don't want any one op to hog it. Limiting the
> number of QSOs by any one operator gives more time for the rest. Nice in
> theory, but as we experience every year, this is ineffective in practice.
> I fact, I think it's possibly counter productive to the objective. Let me
> We see the effect all the time when checking into a net. Net control
> calls for checkins, and there's a roar of RF thrown at him/her from which
> some morsel of a callsign is extracted. Net control narrows the field down
> to that morsel, and the process repeats until a single whole call is
> extracted and logged, then on to the next person.
> Now look at what happens if there is no net control. At the end of a
> contact, everyone throws their callsign out, but lacking a net control,
> there is no clear process for extracting and filtering callsign morsels to
> make a 2-way contact. Instead of trying to succeed making a 1-to-n
> connection, you're trying to create a winning pair out of an m-by-n zoo.
> Eventually timing (yes, a skill), luck, and big hammers (amplifiers) will
> result in one of those m-by-n pairings to succeed, but it will take time.
> If the rules are constructed to remove the winning participants after every
> successful contact, you are forcing that m-by-n chaos to repeat for every
> contact. I submit that this is nuts, given the limited time a satellite is
> within view, the limited bandwidth (especially for FM birds), and with the
> limited number of them that we have.
> Rather, I think it would be better to encourage through the points system *and
> through documentation and training* to let a net control role naturally
> emerge. The net control station gets some small additional benefit for
> ascending to this role by the additional QSOs completed, and the overall
> rate of QSOs completed goes up because you're back to a 1-to-n process, so
> everyone wins in the end. The process also helps develop the operator
> skills of the net control role, just as it does when a station on HF
> "holds" a frequency for a while during a contest. If the station can't
> hold the frequency, due to technique, equipment, or the loss of propagation
> at end of a pass, net control will naturally pass to the next operator with
> the skill and equipment to take on that role.
> The current ARRL rules giving 100 points for the first contact, and 1
> point for each contact beyond that, are aligned with this strategy, though
> I think that adjustments can be made to make it even better. The single
> QSO rule needs to be removed, and in its place should be a set of
> guidelines (training) for good behavior. These include the acknowledgment
> of the net control role, and the documenting of the inefficiency that
> results when there is a power struggle for net control. In this regard, I
> think that lowering the prize for additional contacts to 1 point for every
> two contacts might be better. We don't want the role to be so juicy that
> everyone fights for it; better for some to take that 100 points for the
> first contact as a check-in, and go somewhere else for the incremental ones.
> Bottom line, EMike and others are on the right path with the net control
> role, but we're missing the training aspect showing why it's a good idea,
> and how to behave when you're net control, or just trying to check in.
> Greg KO6TH