[UK-CONTEST] Power Limitations(ONLY WITHIN CONTEST SECTIONS)

Rob Harrison robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk
Sat Jan 28 07:55:43 PST 2012 

Hi Don, Bob & others,


>Bob HGN is taking the view (I believe) that contesting is about ranking
>operator skill and that, therefore, within sections it is necessary to
>level the playing field regarding equipment. This is exactly what the WRTC
>events, for example, attempt to do.

Yes, Don you are correct in your assumption, at least someone gets what I'm 
trying to say.

I've vaguely been "accused" of various things today. So I'll state my views 
in case they are unclear to some.

I'm not asking for the rules to be changed to favour me personally.

I'm not anti-contest, in fact have been contesting for many years, mainly 
VHF/UHF, with a modicom of success.

I'm not asking for every one to have the same power and antennas, 
impractical. It's their choice and conditions that apply to their situation.

I'm not asking for lots of sections within contests, so everyone gets a 
certificate.

I'm not trying to stop innovation and progress.

I am saying, I find it difficult to reconcile a contest that doesn't take 
into account a know value i.e. antenna gain.

How can you possibly compare a station with a large antenna system, with a 
station running a dipole, if they are both running the same o/p power. It's 
absurd. They need to be in seperate sections within a contest. Where those 
section ERP breaks are is for the contest rule writers.

73 Bob G8HGN



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Henderson" <bob.5b4agn at gmail.com>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Power Limitations(ONLY WITHIN CONTEST SECTIONS)


> Rob
>
> I have not been active in UK VHF contests for many years, so my comments
> and observations (including the tongue in cheek) are more general.
>
> I find contests these days have too many categories.  It seems the more
> categories created, the more are requested.
>
> Some seek advantage through rule amendment and introduction of new
> categories which match their capability, whilst others work to enhance
> their capability to gain advantage within the existing rules and 
> categories.
>
> Broadly, I admire the latter but struggle with the former.
>
> Bob
>
>
> On 28 January 2012 13:02, Rob Harrison 
> <robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> This is not about ERP levels for normal everyday communication. ONLY 
>> WITHIN
>> CONTEST SECTIONS. The thread has got a bit off- topic.
>>
>> I'm mainly coming at this from a VHF/UHF standpoint, where ERP can vary
>> greatly between stations in the same section.
>>
>> You seem to be missing my point. All those things are beyond the control 
>> of
>> the contest committee, and I have no problem with any of those points. 
>> Why
>> would seperate ERP sections, stop some one improving there station ?
>>
>> Just because some stations will be improved by these factors:-  where
>> people
>> choose, and can afford, to live (1 & 2) , what they can achive with
>> antennas, (planning & expense) , rigs (expense), operator skill can be
>> improved by hard work. All variables outside the scope of contest rules.
>> That doesn't mean some things within the scope of the rules should be 
>> left
>> as they are, where there is an obvious imbalance.
>>
>> I'm not asking for "awards for ever competitor" just balance WITHIN 
>> CONTEST
>> SECTIONS with regard to ERP.
>>
>> Hopefully you'll see my point.
>>
>> 73 Bob G8HGN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bob Henderson" <bob.5b4agn at gmail.com>
>> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 12:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Power Limitations
>>
>>
>> > Bob
>> >
>> > You could deal with the ERP issue by simply mandating use of an
>> > omni-directional antenna.  Of course, you would need to level the 
>> > playing
>> > field in other areas.  Perhaps by mandating:
>> >
>> > 1.  All stations to be at sea level. (It's so unfair that some have a
>> > height advantage, especially at VHF and above.)
>> > 2.  Inclination to the horizon.  (Those blighters enjoying a clear
>> > take-off
>> > really bug those who don't.)
>> > 3.  Use of a standard receiver perhaps a coherer.
>> >
>> > Once these have been implemented to the applause of the masses you 
>> > might
>> > move on to:
>> >
>> > 4. Levelling the playing field with regard to operator skill.
>> >
>> > Finally when a position has been reached in which neither investment 
>> > nor
>> > skill provide advantage, I would recommend the concept of winning be
>> > abandoned altogether, with trophies becoming available to participants
>> and
>> > non participants alike.  Perhaps this could be funded with the money 
>> > the
>> > RSGB gets back from the ex-GM.
>> >
>> > Welcome to contesting in the 21st century!
>> >
>> > Bob, 5B4AGN
>> >
>> > On 28 January 2012 11:43, Rob Harrison
>> > <robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Ray,
>> >>
>> >> I find this argument re accuracy of ERP frankly poor. I've put this 
>> >> idea
>> >> forward for consideration for VHF/UHF contests, but it would apply to 
>> >> HF
>> >> also. I get the same old weak arguments against, when frankly the
>> >> arguments
>> >> for power only are weak too, as they don't take into account antennas 
>> >> of
>> >> any
>> >> sort, which is bizarre.
>> >>
>> >> Everyone seems to be hung up with the Nth degree of ERP accuracy, 
>> >> surely
>> >> we
>> >> can agree on generic gain for certain antennas, we know the power out,
>> >> feeder loss, it's relatively simple to work out a figure for any given
>> >> station to within fairly accurate limits. Not taking antenna gain into
>> >> account at all is utterly wrong.
>> >>
>> >> It seems there is a reluctance to even try it, are vested interests at
>> >> play
>> >> here?
>> >>
>> >> 73
>> >>
>> >> Bob G8HGN
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Ray Hills" <g3hrh at btinternet.com>
>> >> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> >> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 11:21 AM
>> >> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] Power Limitations
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >I don't think using ERP to set the limit will work because few, if 
>> >> >any,
>> >> > actually have the ability to determine it accurately.  They would 
>> >> > have
>> >> > to
>> >> > rely on the antenna manufacturers' claims, not all of which are
>> >> > reliable
>> >> -
>> >> > or even credible.  Power into the antenna is OK because many (most?)
>> >> > have
>> >> > a
>> >> > Bird, especially if it has the peak power modification.  I find it
>> very
>> >> > reassuring to have a Bird permanently in circuit, as part of the
>> >> > antenna
>> >> > patch panel set-up, to make sure that all is both healthy and within
>> >> > the
>> >> > power limit for any particular contest.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ray  G3HRH
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > UK-Contest mailing list
>> >> > UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> >> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> UK-Contest mailing list
>> >> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > UK-Contest mailing list
>> > UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest

More information about the UK-Contest mailing list