I applaud the committee for their efforts to improve the situation of the
entire VHF+ contesting experience. All of us are busy in the new millennium
and
have no shortage of things to do. These are a few of my thoughts, Pat is
going to submit her comments as well.
As far as "pack roving" and "grid circling" are concerned I applaud those
operators who go to the time and expense and the logistical challenges of
equipping multiple rovers. In the Midwest there have been several such
operations
through the years. Yes, they generated big scores, but they worked lots of
home
stations and other rovers. Having never participated that way I can tell you
that I don't like competing with them. It's like putting single op stations
into the same category as multi ops.
If a group wants to make a big splash and rove together put them into a
separate classification. Let them slug it out.
The recent California expeditions as well as some more modest ones in the
Northwest have generated activity that may not have been there in the past,
raising scores and increasing awareness.
My wife is from Portland, Oregon. We own a house there and may retire out
that way someday. As we picture the tower that will go up and the antennas
that
will top it off we realize that we have many times the number of VHF+
operators within 300 miles of Chicago than we will have out west. I can
understand
the frustration of hard core contesters out that way who exhaust the number of
contacts they can make in VHF+ events because of population and geography. I
think that the mother of the Overbeck experiment addresses that frustration.
The result is that we now know that seven figure scores are possible from
California. By their own admission some of these Qs were made from valleys and
other RF holes that precluded their operations from working others. If these
folks want to go for 2 million I don't think that they should be discouraged.
Just have them compete among others of the same mind.
Another pack vs. solo rover problem can arise when a solo operation and a
pack come within range of each other. The solo operator may be at a four grid
corner when the pack arrives. All rovers work each other and whomever else
they
can. They part company, and go their sperate ways. From the next spot 60 or
so miles away they can all work each other again. Is the solo rover now in
violation of the spirit of the rules? Does the "unassisted" rover stand to
lose
some points or award eligibility? Let group rovers compete against group
rovers. Population and geography may even things out with divisional
recognition.
We run a competitive (for our part of the world) 6 band rover. We honor and
appreciate the efforts of those who run one of the three band radios and
perhaps an HT for 222. They aren't going to win anything except for the
respect of
other operators who are pleased to have the contacts and their own
satisfaction at having met their personal goals. I hope that they are not
discouraged.
It is not unusual for us to reenter a grid after leaving it. It isn't a
matter of doing a better job of working all we can before leaving. It allows
contacts to be made with the maximum number of stations. We usually drive a
circle route, ending up near home at contest end.
Not everybody can be on the air for the entire contest. There are serious
stations who are at it hammer and tong for the entire event. Most ops come and
go, doing what they can to enjoy the contest. I don't want to drive across a
grid for a couple of hours unable to make contacts with people who were mowing
their lawns the last time we drove through.
There are also times that we are at a grid line when we experience a very
slow rate. In one contest we were unable to attract any attention at a line
for
a forty-five minute stop! In those cases we should be allowed to work a
station in grid number one, and then drive over to grid number two. The next
time
we get a call what's wrong with us working that station in grid number two and
then returning to number one? This practice allows us to make as many Qs as
possible with as many stations as possible. It's my impression that a number
of operators are going about life with a radio on .200 with the squelch turned
up. As time and obligations permit they enter the shack and make the
contacts as they can. Let's not discourage them.
I am concerned about the one point per QSO with rovers proposal. Let's say
that 6 meters is open. A home or portable station for is enjoying a nice rate.
Unless the rover is in a rare grid, home or portable stations will be in
greater demand at three points and the rover, with more modest and usually
lower
antennas may be harder to work. If I'm at home, should I dig for a rover if
I've already worked the grid or go for easier higher point pickings.
The newly suggested three band portable 6 hour category could be good. Over
the past several years we have noticed more and more stations with ABD from
the 706, 847 and other three band radios. We're pretty happy about that
development. It's not unusual for one of those ops to tell us that they don't
have
much of an antenna for 432 because it's part of a dual band vertical. Even if
it's a wet noodle, it still gets people on the band, raises scores and adds
mults. The six hour format will appeal to competitors who have to get the kids
to soccer or attend mom's birthday party or who chose to get married on the
second
Saturday in June. I'm not too upset about the lack of 222. In many areas of
the country there's not a lot of FM or weak signal activity. When the six
hour people really get the bug and are able to operate, they'll add the band.
When my extended family decides to have another reunion on a contest weekend
the
six hour category might encourage me to do both.
New versus old rover rules. OK. I wasn't real upset when they went the
other way because I figured that since I only compete against other rovers it
wasn't a really big deal. We'll have to see what the effect on the whole is
after
an outing or two.
I am a member of three clubs, all of which do all they can to generate all
the submissions they can. We have to pick out one to submit based upon the
route covered. I like adding to the club effort.
More bands in the car. Right now we are discussing adding 2304 as well as
some other improvements. It seems to me that since most 2304 Qs will be one or
two points for the rover and always one point for the home station it may not
be worth the time and effort to add another band. Since we run and gun and we
don't have a whole lot of mountains around here to perch on top it may not
be. It may give us incentive to improve our ears and ERP on 900 and 1296. We
already make what would be 3 point QSOs for us on those bands, but they can
take a lot of time to complete. Should we just operate ABCD where we have
plenty
of suds and rush on to the next grid?
They say that talking on a cell phone increase the risk of accidents. Try
three microphones, two keys, and a couple of frequency displays. It is
comforting to have fixed stations keeping tabs on us. They will call in to ask
how
it's going, and how much longer for the next grid. But that's not all of it.
They offer encouragement and tell us how are efforts are appreciated. That's a
big part of why we do it.
After the dust settles on these proposals, K0PG/Rovair will still be out
there trying hard to work as many stations from as many grids as possible in
the
most efficient and effective manner. I can't help it, this is the part of the
service that I enjoy most. 73, Tim K0PG
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|