[VHFcontesting] APRS and Contesting/Roving

[Jim Erickson]

Duane,

Thank you! I agree with you 100%.

Now every one keep turning your beams and start looking for us Rovers.  We
don't need new rules to make it easier.  We just need stations out there
that will "listen for the weak ones" as Bill W3IY used to say.  Those
stations will be the winners in more ways than one!

73,

Jim K3LFO/R




On Fri, August 10, 2007 10:12 am, Duane - N9DG wrote:
> If APRS is to be allowed then we may as well also allow
> contest time phone calls and QSO chat pages. Let's just turn VHF contesting
> into being a 100% outside of the contest communications means scheduled
> operating event. Doing that would solve the pesky problem of the APRS gear
> interfering with the "weak signal" gear. And it would also save everybody
> money too, less gear to buy, have, and maintain.
>
> Taking this even further lets allow Q solicitation during the
> contest via repeaters as well. That will surely drum up activity since the
> goal here seems to be geared toward finding ways to create more activity
> at any cost. And then make sure that people that are brought in are all
> easy "shoot the fish in barrel" Q's, let's just not trouble ourselves with
> those marginally possible Q's, they're too challenging, and they slow my Q
> rate down too much.
>
> Somewhere a long the way the whole point of what VHF
> contesting is all about I think has become lost. Are we doing it just to
> rack up big Q counts? Or are we doing it to see what our *weak signal*
> gear, and *ourselves* are capable of achieving for cumulative *DX* within
> a 33 hour period? Or are we now just trying to see what our out outside of
> the shack networking capabilities are?
>
> I simply don't buy the notion that making contesting *easier*
> is a worthy goal. And I don't think it will entice many new participants
> who will *stick* with it in the *long* run. They will quickly bore with
> it, and be gone after just a few contests. Not unlike the way people
> quickly bore with repeater operation.
>
> In addition I just don't buy the notion that:
>
>
> 1. Easier = more fun.
> 2. More challenging = less fun.
>
>
> Ham radio from its earliest beginnings was all about seeking
> new challenges, not to be looking for ways to avoid them. Those who get
> into ham radio and avoid challenges rarely stick with it, or ever become
> very active. We just don't want to take VHF contesting there too.
>
> Look at the general personality traits of the grizzled
> veterans of VHF weak signal, and VHF contesting. They are more often than
> not those who personally *seek out* challenges. They also seek to improve
> their station's capabilities via better equipment that improves their RF
> performance, not their "outside of the shack" data networking capability.
>
> Don't get me wrong I'm not against technology and computer
> integration with radio. Far from it. By I think we collectively should
> insist that it be used to increase the RF processing, and the *direct*
> signal finding capability (panadapters, waterfalls, etc.) of our stations.
> As soon as
> we start applying computer technologies as a means to create a
> semi-automated, quasi-scheduling networks for making contacts, then we
> have crossed the line. APRS clearly crosses that line.
>
> Duane
> N9DG
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> ___________Ready for the edge of your seat?
> Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
> http://tv.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
>