[VHFcontesting] Updated - Rover activity and otherwise in June ARRL VHF

[James Duffey]

Shortly after the initial posting of claimed scores for the June 2009 VHF Contest, I did a brief analysis on the Rover activity in the June Contest and posted it to the list. Now that the final results are out, I thought I would revise the post with the latest numbers.

Here is the chart of activity in the June VHF QSO Party since the inception of the Rover class in 1991:

Year  Entries Rovers % total Notes

2009  1152    102     8.9              
2008  1074     96     8.9    3 rover classes
2007   860     98    11.3
2006  1047     96     9.2
2005   840     92    11.2
2004   766     91    11.9
2003   818     92    11.2
2002   672     84    12.5
2001   680     61     9.0
2000   749     62     8.3
1999   701     75    10.7
1998   865     72     8.3
1997   837     74     8.8
1996   923     72     7.8
1995   837     52     6.2    Current scoring implemented
1994   781     68     8.7
1993   818     63     7.7    Rules change due to grid circling
1992   840     64     7.6
1991   710     50     7.0    Rover class begun

I hope that the table formatting held up. It is best viewed with a monospaced typeface like Courier.
 
Rich, K1TEO has also posted a nice summary on the Rover activity in the June 2009 contest on the Web Report:

< http://www.arrl.org/members-only/contests/results/2009/jun-vhf/sidebar1.html >

The 2009 June VHF contest and roving activity is at a high not seen for many years and this is good. It shows that the VHF contesting community is growing, or at least holding its own. Some of the increased activity may be due to the popularity of the Fred Fish Memorial Award as well. The presence of modest, but not pervasive Sporadic E also helped activity. 

This was the second June Contest with the new roving categories and the results are interesting:


Year	Classic	Limited  Unlimited Total

2009       60     37        5      102

2008       61     26        8       95

The growth in rover activity from 2008 to 2009 came entirely in the Limited Rover category, which saw a growth of 40%! While it is nice to see this kind of growth in rover activity, it is probably not good in the long run for those who operate microwave bands in the contest as the Classic Rover category stayed stagnant. The sample is small and the new categories have only been in use two years, so it is probably not prudent to draw too many conclusions from these numbers. Still, the unlimited category does not seem to have caught on. There was no major group of pack rovers in the June contest either. 

I have started to look at the effect on 222 MHz activity due to the Limited Rover rules change this year. More on that later. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM