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

Sat Jan 28 15:31:11 PST 2012

Rob

In saying, "All the things you quote are NOT things the contest can
arbitrate on, they are personal choices."

Do you mean to suggest that to invest in a yagi or make do with a halo is
not a personal choice?

Call me strange but I kind of think it is.

Bob, 5B4AGN

On 28 January 2012 16:39, Rob Harrison <robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>
> > For my part it's not that I don't understand your point, it's that I
> don't
> > agree with it.
>
>
> Ok that's fine, each to his own.
>
> On my point, it still appears you aren't grasping the concept. I would like
> to minimise the number of variables within sections. All the things you
> quote are NOT things the contest can arbitrate on, they are personal
> choices.
>
> You seem to have the belief I'm trying to stifle innovation and take
> someone
> personal freedoms away, by telling people what gear they can use or where
> they can live, or how they run their stations. How would an ERP based
> contest do that, it's just a different set of rules.
>
> > The technical
> > aspects are just as big a part of what brings interest to contesting and
> > for some a much bigger part.  Take these away and I believe contesting
> > would rapidly lose it's interest for those who currently compete as
> > opposed
> > to participate.
>
> Where have I said in any of my posts that I want to take away the technical
> aspects?
>
> Most of the posts in reply to me have brought up spurious arguments, no-one
> has actually, apart from Don, seen what I'm on about. But at least it's
> being debated.
>
> 73 Bob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Henderson" <bob.5b4agn at gmail.com>
> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 4:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Power Limitations(ONLY WITHIN CONTEST SECTIONS)
>
>
> > Rob
> >
> > For my part it's not that I don't understand your point, it's that I
> don't
> > agree with it.
> >
> > How can we compare:
> >
> > 1. A station located as 3000ft ASL with one at 10ft ASL?
> >
> > 2. A station with a 50 mile horizon with one at 50 metres?
> >
> > We do!
> >
> > We all have options on just how much trouble we put ourselves to in the
> > interests of competition.  Do we brave the elements travelling hundreds
> of
> > miles and climbing thousands of feet or do we sit as sea level in our
> cosy
> > shack with a halo?
> >
> > Writing rules to control ERP might make sense where it is also possible
> to
> > control the above but even then, only where operating skill is the sole
> > aspect of interest.  As Ian GM3SEK points out, most contesters consider
> > operating to be only part of what contesting is about.  The technical
> > aspects are just as big a part of what brings interest to contesting and
> > for some a much bigger part.  Take these away and I believe contesting
> > would rapidly lose it's interest for those who currently compete as
> > opposed
> > to participate.
> >
> > Bob, 5B4AGN
> >
> > On 28 January 2012 15:55, Rob Harrison
> > <robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>wrote:
> >
> >> 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
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>