Re: [VHFcontesting] Preventing grid circling.

["Erich Oetting KI0SK" <ki0sk@arrl.net>]

On Feb 26, 2004, at 9:58 AM, Dan Evans wrote:

> I wouldn't want to place a limit on the time a Rover has to wait before
> leaving a grid.  That would be to restrictive on normal Roving.
>
> For example, if you place a 15 minute rule before activating the next 
> grid
> when I get to a 4 grid corner it's going to take a full hour for me to 
> work
> that corner.  That's too restrictive on 'run and gun' type Rovers.
>
> However, a key to grid circling is for each Rover to BACKTRACK through 
> each
> of the grids to make sure that each of the Rovers has worked the 
> others in
> and FROM every grid.  This means that each Rover has to make multiple 
> trips
> through the grids.
>
> So, if instead of a minimum time in grid rule, we go with a minimum 
> time
> before RE-ENTERING a grid, we have stopped circling without being 
> overly
> restrictive to normal Rovers.  For example, placing a 1 hour time limit
> before you can re-enter a grid would allow a 'run and gun' Rover to 
> work a
> grid corner without slowing him down.  However, a pack of circling 
> Rovers
> would only get the 4 mults and 4 QSO's per band, instead of the 
> current 16.
> Unless they want to take the 4 hours it would take to go back through 
> each
> grid.  Which would efficiently slow them down as well.
>
> I know there are a lot of Rovers that would object to this because it 
> is
> still restrictive of normal Rovers.  For example, when I travel up I465
> through Indianapolis I pass from EM69 into EM79 and back again within 
> a few
> miles as the road curves across the grid boundary.  I usually try to 
> pick up
> some contacts on 2m FM while going through the different grids.  The
> re-entry rule would prevent me from working some of them.  So this is 
> not a
> perfect solution, but it seems to be the LEAST restrictive.  And I'm 
> afraid
> if we want to come up with a hard and fast rule to prevent grid 
> circling,
> then we are likely to have endure some restrictions.  If someone would 
> can
> come up with better solution, I would certainly like to see it.  Or do 
> we
> need a solution?  Rovers?

I could deal with a 15 minute rule on revisiting a grid.  It would slow 
down grid circling without forcing big changes in my operation.  
Requiring an hour between grid re-activations would make it tough for 
me to give away some really tough grids.

Here is one example.  Last summer I activated DN61, first from Snowy 
Pass and later from an area west of Baggs, Wyoming known as the Poison 
Buttes.  I then dropped south into DN60 and headed west.  Just before I 
left DN60, six meters opened up to Southern California.  I worked 
everyone I could, then crossed the grid boundary into DN51 and worked 
them again.   Several miles west of the grid boundary, I found a dirt 
road into DN51 that petered out on top of a ridge.  While there the 
band opening shifted and I started to hear a lot of new stations.  It 
would have been a shame to have to go QRT on my way back home via DN50 
and DN60.

> P.S.  I think it's time to drop the 146.52 rule...

On my roving expeditions, about half of my activated grids I never get 
to work.  The few hams that live in those grids tend to monitor 146.52 
and the local repeater.  But I understand the reasons for prohibiting 
contact fishing on those frequencies.

Any ideas on how to get small town hams to keep an ear out for us 
during contests?

  73 de KI0SK (Erich)

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting