[UK-CONTEST] 2009 UKAC Rules

[Ray James]

--- On Fri, 3/10/08, Andy Swiffin <a.l.swiffin at dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

> > The majority of participation (going by the claimed
> & results pages) comes
> > from JO00, 01, 02, 03, IO90, 91, 92, 80, 81 and 82
>
> Actually, Ray, how did you find that out (for 144)? 
> I've just been browsing the results and while the
> locator is stated for 50, 70 and 432 it's notably
> lacking on the 144mhz results!!   Isn't this a bit of an
> oversight, it makes reading the results a bit pointless!! 
> I hadn't really looked at them before but I notice all
> the 144mhz results from past years don't have the
> locators in either - I'm surprised no-ones complained
> before!
>
> Andy
> gm8oeg

Hi Andy,
The locators can be found within the "Claimed Scores" pages and then cross referenced against the results pages if you so wish.

I was keeping my fingers crossed that the survey question of only UK squares counting for multiplier status would come to fruition as this would not negate those who can already work easily into to deepest EU from doing so but it would allow greater interest to work all the UK squares which in turn encourages stations in every UK square to be active.   

>Yes please.
>Had I been given the opportunity I would have voted for that too. 

The link to the survey was to be found on the main index page of the VHFCC website so everyone had the opportunity to provide input as long as they noticed it. I'm sure I'm not alone in visiting the site and immediately heading for an area I'm interested in so it is easy to miss "front page" items that rarely change in favour of claimed scores/results pages which are updated almost daily. Without checking, I think Tim may have mentioned it in RadCom but I would need to check that.
As a matter of fact, I only found the 2009 calendar and rule changes by accident yesterday whilst trying to help someone off the Microwave reflector who answered my publicity bulletin for this weekends 1.2GHz/2.3GHz Trophy contest, asking if there was a QRP section? That sent me scurrying to check the rules and when I noticed the new 2009 information with dismay.
You are probably not the only one who missed the survey so perhaps the publicity for it could have been better and perhaps covering more than UKAC. For example, I find it incompatible that the multiplier for all UKAC's is just locators, no matter if you live in Deal or Durness, yet the 1st and 2nd 50MHz Contests include postal code districts amongst the potential multipliers, this on a band that has the potential for world-wide communication!
I would suggest it would make the 50MHz Contests very exciting indeed with locators, countries and postal codes. In addition to suggesting only UK locators count for multiplier status, I also agreed with the survey question asking for favour of including postal code multiplier status.
What did we get? No change despite some mouth watering options, M2 remains.

73 Ray GM4CXM