I agree with Duane, using that formula would discourage the use of better
antennas, personally I think that an ERP category is a terrible idea.
Additionally, the theorticaly max gain of antenna is determined mainly by the
length of the boom, not how many elements it has.
In my opinion, classes by power does a great job of allowing lower budget
stations to remain competitive. I can built a 1.6 wavelength 2m antenna for
$30 that will give me the same gain as a $300 amp.
My 2 cents,
Marten
KC8HZM
Quoting Duane Grotophorst <n9dg@yahoo.com>:
> On Dec 14, 2003, at 8:09 AM, Ev Tupis (W2EV) wrote:
> >
> > (Element count) x (RF Output) = Entry Category is
> > a great way to categorize our
> > efforts without compromizing our future by
> > encouraging less band-participation
> > or band-reporting.
>
> I'm not sure I agree, while it may not discourage
> adding new bands for a better score it will discourage
> the building of a better station as far as antennas
> go. The last thing we want to do is discourage the
> building of a better overall station, which is
> normally done by adding more bands and/or improving
> performance with better antennas, feedlines, and
> equipment.
>
> For example using antenna element (or gain) X power
> would give HT's an huge correction factor. And then
> for example taking this to the extreme a small group
> of 100 or so ops all with tri and quad band HT's
> roving around a grid corner and doing the classic
> "grid dance" could completely win a VHF contest, - and
> do it without ever making Q over few miles in
> distance. Even if they were not "rovers" and there
> were 25 ops in each grid they would still rack up a
> big score quickly and easily. So is ERP-based scoring
> the direction we really want to push VHF contesting
> towards?
>
> I suppose the negative effects of such a scheme could
> be largely offset by using a distance based scoring
> element, that way emphasis is shifted back towards
> trying to figure out how to make our stations better
> and more capable rather than trying figure out how to
> fill a barrel with fish to shoot. It is the pushing of
> the limits for our equipment and shack layout that
> drives us toward adding new bands and adding better
> equipment like radios, antennas and/or power. A
> distance based scoring element will do more for
> achieving that than trying level the playing field by
> limiting the number of bands or adding score
> correction factors for our equipment capability.
>
> Additionally a distance based scoring system that is
> based on 6 digit grid square contest exchanges is more
> enforceable because all of the required data is
> already in the logs that would be submitted. Arguably
> the current scoring scheme does already reward longer
> distance q's by the virtue of higher multiplier
> totals, however its granularity is too coarse,
> especially so for the higher bands.
>
> Duane
> N9DG
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|