The log submission has closed for the 2010 June ARRL VHF QSO Party and claimed
scores have been posted on the ARRL site. It was a successful contest with 1107
Cabrillo logs submitted and if previous years are any indication, another 100
or so paper logs with 10 of them being rovers will be added.
Overall activity appears to be strong and comparable to previous years, so the
contest is healthy, if not growing slightly. Widespread sporadic E over much of
the country during most of the contest kept interest up and people at their
operating position. The widespread and lengthy Es made roving very effective
and productive. Good Es activity usually results in lots of logs being
submitted.
Below are the preliminary 2010 results tabulated with previous years. As I am
primarily interested in the Rover class, this table only goes back to 1991, the
year the Rover Category was instituted. The Rover category as a whole appears
to be healthy, if down a bit from previous years, but when paper logs are
submitted, the total fraction of rovers will probably be pretty close to
historic values. The price of fuel was reasonable this year, so that had little
effect on rover activity.
Year Entries Rovers % total Notes
2010 1107* 88* 7.9* *No paper logs
2009 1152 102 8.9
2008 1074 96 8.9 New Rover categories
2007 860 98 11.3
2006 1047 96 9.2
2005 840 92 11.2
2004 766 91 11.9
2003 818 92 11.2
2002 672 84 12.5
2001 680 61 9.0
2000 749 62 8.3
1999 701 75 10.7
1998 865 72 8.3
1997 837 74 8.8
1996 923 72 7.8
1995 837 52 6.2 Rules Change
1994 781 68 8.7
1993 818 63 7.7 Rules Change
1992 840 64 7.6
1991 710 50 7.0 Rover class initiated
Below is a table with the breakdown by Rover category since 2008, the first
year multiple Rover categories were used. Due to ambiguities in the Cabrillo
tags, I suspect that there are really only 5 Unlimited Rover entries this year
and that the other four belong in the Limited Rover or Classic Rover classes.
There are similar ambiguities, although not as many, in the Limited Rover
entries, but I suspect that will get sorted before the results are finalized.
If you are a rover, you may want to check your entry in the logs submitted page
on the ARRL Site and drop KX9X an e-mail with the correct entry class if you
have different categories in the Category and Type Columns listed on the logs
submitted page.
Year Classic Limited Unlimited Total
2010 37 42 9 88
2009 60 37 5 102
2008 61 26 8 95
The migration of operators from the Classic Rover category jumps out at one
from this table. It appears that many are going to the Limited Rover category.
As of now it appears that the Limited Rover entries will outnumber the Classic
Rover entries for the first time since the categories were introduced. Even if
all of the remaining logs to be submitted are Classic Rovers, this will still
be a significant drop in Classic Rover activity. This cannot be healthy for
contest microwave activity. I suppose that this migration from Classic Rover to
Limited Rover is to be expected as a similar migration was seen from Multi to
Limited Multi years ago. The growth in the Limited Rover category appears to be
healthy, but it is not due to attracting new operators with 706 class rigs as
was envisioned when the category was created, but rather appears to be coming
at the expense of Classic Rovers. So the question remains unanswered, what do
we do to attract Joe-706 pack to VHF contesting? T
he Unlimited Rover category continues to languish with only 9 (and perhaps as
few as 5) entries and, as far as I can tell, only KR0VER/r and N0LP/r used it
was envisioned when the category was created. Can this category continue
without more activity or a rules change to encourage more participants?
There were several big, for the category anyway, scores put up in the Limited
Rover Category. And, with a single exception, these scores were put up by
Limited Rovers operating alone, without the benefit of coordination with other
rovers at grid boundaries. K5HN/r put up a score of 92,738 topping the Limited
Rover category with no apparent coordinated activity with other rovers.
Ironically, this was for the North Texas Microwave Society.:^)= NO5LA/r, whose
claimed score does not appear on the ARRL web page with his log submission, but
who posted a claimed score of 86,339 on the 3830 site, also appeared to operate
without coordination with other rovers. Less than 2000 points separate the
apparent 3rd, 4th, and 5th place finishers in the Limited Rover Category,
showing that this is indeed a competitive category. Interestingly enough,
W6YLZ/r may have been handicapped by his participation with the Southern
California Contest Club coordinated rovers as his claimed score is signi
ficantly down from his score last year when he roved solo. There appear to be
8 limited rover scores above 50,000, which, over the past couple of years,
several on this list declared was impossible without coordinated roving. Well,
seven of those scores appear to be done with no coordination with other rovers.
In the past it has also been said on this list that Limited Rovers who did not
engage in coordinated roving techniques such as pack roving and grid circling
could not be competitive with those that did partake in those practices, even
with lots of Es. This year's contest clearly shows that is no longer the case.
Limiting the bands to the lowest four and the number of QSOs with rovers seems
to have had its effect in the Limited Rover category.
The Southern California Contest Club coordinated rovers have the 6 top claimed
scores in the Classic Rover category and, with two other Southern California
Contest Club rovers who did not submit claimed scores, appear to have the top 8
Rover spots nailed down. Coordinated roving is an effective strategy for
winning the club competition, especially when bolstered by even modest fixed
station contributed scores from other club members. I wonder though, if the
domination of the Classic Rover category by the Southern California Contest
Club pack rovers is driving some Classic Rovers to the Limited Rover category
to where they perceive that they can be more competitive.
With the 10 vehicle rover pack from Southern California well ensconced in the
VHF and UHF contests, and perhaps several more from around the country whose
similar activities do not rack up such large scores, and probably a similar
number of captive rovers who do not submit logs, it dawns on me that this
activity, which I lump under coordinated roving, has reached 15% or 20% of the
total rover activity in ARRL contests. When one thinks about it, this is a
relatively large number compared to the total number of rovers. Political
Scientists, for example, cite this number as what is generally required to
support significant social change. There are pluses and minuses to this
activity and many of the pros and cons have been discussed on this list before,
but the number of rovers who participate in coordinated roving is becoming
significant and the impact of their activities continues to grow. As an example
of one impact, It appears to me that one cannot currently win a contest com
petition in the medium category without at least a modest contribution from
coordinated roving.
When one ponders it, having ten-10 band stations that can be deployed at 75 mph
essentially anywhere within a 175 mile circle in any of several categories, not
just the rover categories, is a powerful tool. Those stations will have a
significant impact in a contest, even if their use is restricted in the Rover
categories.
Some thoughts. I will update this assessment when the results are final. -
Duffey
--
James Duffey KK6MC
DM65tc
Cedar Crest NM
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|