I really don't think scoring CW differently than SSB is a good idea. As some others have pointed out or questioned is how do you deal with mixed mode contacts? I usually make several in every contest
One change I would like to see the VHF/UHF contest sponsors make is to add an FM only category to the various contests. What better way to infect many the FM only capable crowd with the VHF contestin
My experiences have been similar, so I almost never make skeds for that reason. I've also had rather limited success catching rovers at their previously announced times for the more distant grids. It
Like most of the previous respondents I too would go with 222, despite its reputation of being inactive I consistently work almost as many grids on 222 as I do on 432 during contests. The propagation
< 3. The value of each grid square multiplier is based on the distance of the center of that grid to the center of your grid. To make things easy, your own grid would count as one. The next grid over
Given the all the posting regarding this topic it is clear that there is plenty of angst among the VHF contester crowd. Perhaps it is time for a significant rules overhaul for the ARRL VHF contests.
Much of this particular thread assumes that the main goal is to "level the playing field" which has been correctly pointed out is not possible. Perhaps instead the underlying goal for some of the sug
1. The perception that VHF contesting has become "defacto" microwave contests. I really don't believe this is so, at least here in the upper Midwest, do having the microwave bands make a big differen
-- "Hoffman, Mark" <mhoffman@microwavedata.com> wrote: Marginally true, but you must consider that most of the beneficiaries of such a scheme would be smaller stations who work the big guns over a gr
It's funny how times change. Back in the early 80's it was Icom who took VHF/UHF SSB/CW seriously when the others didn't, now they seemed to be dropping the ball pretty left and right for some reason
Interesting topic and a number of equally interesting comments. The key guidelines that I would go by are (theses are primarily in the context of the existing VHF awards and contesting): 1. All elem
How about this for a slightly wacky idea: The ARRL could "enter" the non log submitters in absentia, it would really be just a matter of extracting the call sign, Q, and multiplier data from all thos
-- "Mark S. Adams, P.E." <msadams@acsu.buffalo.edu> wrote: To be clear the spectrum sweep sensitivity is rather modest, it won't find the really weak ones out there. Although it was interesting to se
And don't forget all those FT100's and IC-706's ridding around in vehicles out there. All they need to do is drive to a couple different respectable locations and park for awhile at each and work som
I mostly agree, top end RF performance is a must, the all current do everything boxes are filled to brim with bells and whistles, most of which still don't help you SEE what's happening on the bands
Bingo! - Now where can I start buying this stuff?? Now before the naysayers start talking about poor RF performance because this concept would use <gasp> - computers, I want to stress this technology
I do pretty much do the same thing since mode is not actually required for ARRL QSOP log submission, additionally there are always several mixed mode (CW/SSB) Q's in every contest anyhow. I also gene
While the TS2000 FT847 types of radios will get you onto many VHF/UHF bands quite inexpensively they may not be the best way to go if you really want to operate all the VHF/UHF bands simultaneously,
I couldn't agree more, sounds like loads of fun. Duane - N9DG in the Corn AND alfalfa fields of south central WI - EN53bj. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Fa
-- "Andrew T. Flowers, K0SM" <flowersa@alltel.net> wrote: In some ways 1km is a rather arbitrary distance itself, wouldn't it make more sense to specify a minimum distance that is further than you ca