[VHFcontesting] 6meter

[David Olean]

Hi Ron,
    I am with you, but anytime the concept is brought up, the complaints 
start flying.  The fact is that contest stations are built to accomodate the 
conditions in the geographical area of that station.  I live in a remote 
area far away from most VHF active population centers. The only one I can 
take adavntage of is the Boston Area, about 100 miles away. Philly is 350 
miles. NYC is 250 miles away.  Needless to say, a seven element two meter 
yagi would be a waste of time here. If I lived between Philly or NYC I might 
be very happy with a seven element yagi. I could be competitive, 
contestwise, as the numbers of stations I could work would be high. Here in 
rural Maine, I would work about 25 stations.
    The complaints revolve around the unfair advantage gained from:
1. Running high power  VHF amps cost too much and are not affordable for 
many.
2. Big antennas They are unfair too.   I can't swing a big antenna in my 
yard.
3. Towers cost way too much money. I can't compete without a big tower.
4. Running too many bands.  Transceivers are too expensive making it 
impossible to compete.

    Still it would be fun to have distance scoring.  It removes the 
advantage, to a small extent, of stations in high population areas. I think 
it levels the geographical playing field a bit.

Dave K1WHS


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Hooper" <w4wa at alltel.net>
To: "Gabor Horvath, VE7DXG" <ve7dxg at rac.ca>
Cc: <VHFcontesting at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 6meter


> Hi Gabor
>
> I would and have for years like to see distance based scoring for the VHF
> contest. This keeps coming up and talked about but nothing ever happens.
> Some of the issues are that contest logging software would need to be
> developed and used by all entries. 6 digit grid square information may or
> may not need to be used. The old record scores may or not stand. I think 
> the
> rover stratigy would change some but not so much for the fixed station. 
> More
> stations might seak higher locations or increase their antenna system to 
> get
> more distance. The guys in the less populated areas could take advange of
> distance. I am sure there are many changes that would be involved but 
> after
> reading all the comments on ethics and rule interpetation on the 
> reflector,
> I doubt that we could ever make it work as a group.
>
> For me working long distance on VHF and up is what it is all about.
>
>
> Ron W4WA
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Gabor Horvath, VE7DXG <ve7dxg at rac.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> Wow, passionate replies...
>> Yeah, I drove 300km to start the contet in a rare grid (CO60) just to 
>> find
>> that instead of the 60 elements I got 15-20' above the car I would've got
>> away with 5.
>> A 6m opening greatly cuts down the number of 2m (and up) QSOs, especially
>> the number of DX worked. I'm not gonna CQ off  .200 for 20 minutes for a
>> lousy new grid when I can "run 'em" on 6m with my shiny new whip.
>> It'd be nice to see a contest  with some sort of distance based scoring. 
>> We
>> all know our 6 digit grid square (see Spring Sprints). Give 1p/km on 6m,
>> 2p/km on 2, 3p/km on 432, etc. The Sprints might be a good start for such 
>> a
>> system. I'd rather eke out an 300 mile CW contact on 2m then working 10
>> guys
>> in 2.5 minutes down the street.
>> 73,
>> Gabor, VE7DXG
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>  VHFcontesting mailing list
>> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting