[UK-CONTEST] Uk activity on VHF

Andy Swiffin a.l.swiffin at dundee.ac.uk
Thu Apr 8 05:50:39 PDT 2010

>>> On 07/04/2010 at 23:38, in message <2f8bf.1710d9fd.38ee634b at aol.com>,
<Regwoolley at aol.com> wrote:

> I am just as hacked off about some of the rules but I just 
> get on with it! 


Why should we have to put up with some rules that "As Far As I Can See" a _lot_ of people disagree with?

>From the discussions on here it seems to me that quite a few people have expressed discontent with rules such as the ban on on4kst and the M2 multiplier in _UK_ contests.

Why should we just have to "get on with it".   OK, if it was UK Law we were talking about then little me isn't going to have a big impact.   But these are just rules created by a rather small group of people  there to "serve" another not all that large group of people.    The committee has chosen to be there to serve the needs of the members,  if the members are unhappy with what the committee has done I don't see why I should just put up with it.

Where is the accountability?

>>> On 08/04/2010 at 11:48 Paul_group <paul_group at greenrover.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> The die-hard vhf dx men will probably still come on from IO86 and IO70 
> etc and be happy to work some DX whatever the situation but in order to 
> encourage more activity the new blood has to actually be able to hear 
> someone to talk to and make a few QSO's to start with.

Well I guess that has to be either me or Stewart (can't speak for 70)  and I wouldn't be too sure about that.   It's nice to  have the monthly hook up with the same old calls, and all the way down to the two in IO80, but I can't see me doing it much longer.

> one contributor here has stated that in 
> the same time frame he can work more stations random MS from his GM 
> location than he can during a UKAC.

Yep, that was me too.

> The fixed station sweeper category looked like it might create an 
> interesting contest within a contest,
>... only if I want to enter, I cant 
> call CQ! so imagine how exciting it would be to work on just 70cm and 
> 23cm with narrow beams when you live in the extremities. 
> IMO VHFCC got that one badly wrong. I accept that on 2m its a different 
> story but 70 and 23 it is a different case. I never got an answer to 
> this point of view when I asked VHFCC directly but there was a cryptic 
> comment in Radcom that suggested "I didn't get it" which was a little 
> disappointing.

ahh another rule that didn't seem to align with the members wishes, again quite a few people I know expressed the same opinion.   Perhaps its the distance to the activity but IMHO it is nearly the same on 2M as for UHF from up here.   Not being able to call CQ meant that I couldn't hook up with loads of the small portables who were largely S&P, kind of defeats the object?.

>>No. I said it was an England Activity Contest in all but name.
>>Just look at the current 227 cumulated 2m UKAC entries for Jan, Feb, March.


>As for an English contest as the vast majority of the population live in England (say's he a Welshman in G). 
>Then it goes without saying the entrants will be on the main in England!

England : Scotland
60M : 5M


So, there should be 19 entrants from Scotland.

>>> On 08/04/2010 at 01:50,  Ray James <gm4cxm at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Ditch the ban and M2!

hear hear. 


Please consider the environment.  Do you really need to print this email?

The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish charity, No: SC015096

More information about the UK-Contest mailing list