Buck,
I disagree with a couple of your statements.
You said: "The CA rovers were not a single contest operation - they
submitted individual logs" and "the simple fact is that they are all
individuals, participating as individual stations".
If those assertions were entirely true, there would be no controversy.
While they did submit individual logs, your conclusion that they were
individual stations based on that alone is not correct.
The fact is that they were not acting as individual stations. Truly
separate rovers would not have done what they did. They were in fact acting
in concert, in a deliberate, calculated, pre-planned way which I believe
does not fit any existing category.
Should there be a category like this? Sure - why not? I suggest that it be
called "Rover Team" or similar with new rules defining *what is allowed* in
that category.
I liken this to someone operating high power in a contest that only has
entry categories for low power or QRP. Sure they can operate, and their
QSOs are good, but they are not competing with the people who are operating
within the limits of the defined categories. This just happened last
weekend in the NAQP CW Contest. Their entry should be classified as a check
log, since their operation does not align with any current entry category.
Clearly, the same applies in this case.
For this and all other contests, I also think that the rules need to be
written from the perspective of what is permitted so that it is clear that
if it ain't in the rules, it ain't allowed. The loophole perspective that
anything that isn't specifically outlawed is OK, strikes me as
unsportsmanlike and should not be encouraged.
You also said: "I never, ever made a random QSO above the 70cm band, and
respectfully submit that physics (i.e. beamwidth) demands some amount of
planning in order to make a successful QSO."
I disagree that you need to plan in advance. I'm not saying you can't make
a sked, or *publicly* publish your operating / travel plans.
You further said: If someone can demonstrate how I can drive to a random
hilltop, set my dishes up in random directions and elevations, call CQ on
random frequencies at random times in a VHF contest with microwaves
(microwaves = points) AND increase my score, then I'm all ears.
Well, listen here. If you do what you said, you are clearly not thinking
about how to deal with this conundrum.
Answer: It's a VHF contest - use the tools you are allowed to use! Common
practice used to be establishing communication on lower bands (like 6m, 2m,
432 etc.), then turning your antennas to point at the station you want to
work, and QSYing up to the higher bands form there. You can pass along all
the data you might need to the other station on the air during the contest.
Imagine that - using radio during the contest!
73,
Bob W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: Buck Calabro [mailto:kc2hiz@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 5:26 PM
To: VHF Contesting
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] How to increase my score, or why should I try?
> > Doesn't general contest rule 8 specifically allow club competition?
> > Isn't the point that one wants one's own club to win the contest?
>
> This has nothing to do with the ARRL Club Competition.
-snip-
> In both cases, what we have is a single contest operation using more
> than one callsign to make contacts with itself to artificially boost
> its score so that one of its callsigns can be the recognized winner of
> a category in the contest.
Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been. The club competition
explicitly recognises that human beings like to help others. That we, as
social folk like to help people we know. That altruism is a Good Thing.
The CA rovers were not a single contest operation - they submitted
individual logs. They are friends who activated an incredible number of
grids, put 500+ calls into their logs and also worked each other as they
drove. If anybody else put 500+ calls into the log they'd get a slap on the
back.
The two guys who made 100 less QSOs weren't robotic slaves faithfully
executing the will of 'the master.' The same goes for the much maligned
'captive rovers.' They aren't mindless drones calling home to 'the mother
ship' milling by the thousands, intent on making Mother the sole winner.
No matter how many times they are portrayed this way, the simple fact is
that they are all individuals, participating as individual stations. Like
all contesters they are working the stations that are easiest for them to
work. The undercurrent is that they planned their strategy before leaving,
and that a planned excursion is unsportsmanlike, whereas random QSOs are the
proper way to go about it.
I never, ever made a random QSO above the 70cm band, and respectfully submit
that physics (i.e. beamwidth) demands some amount of planning in order to
make a successful QSO. Location (no trees in THAT direction), timing (they
have to be awake) and pointing (narrow
beamwidth) are crucial to making a microwave QSO.
If someone can demonstrate how I can drive to a random hilltop, set my
dishes up in random directions and elevations, call CQ on random frequencies
at random times in a VHF contest with microwaves (microwaves = points) AND
increase my score, then I'm all ears.
Respectfully, KC2HIZ/r, Buck
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|