Subject: VHF Contesting / Captive rovers
I am getting very tired of this discussion too, but I'm tired of the lack of
understanding of and continued denial of what the problem is.
The problem is that these captive rovers are in fact part of the operation
of the big station they are captive to.
Again, the problem is that these captive rovers are in fact part of the
operation of the big station they are captive to.
Period.
Their purpose is focused on making qsos with the multi-op only.
They plan their operation carefully with the multi-op team. You might say,
they plan as if they are part of the multi-op team... which they are.
There is no independence whatsoever or *intent* to work other stations. A
few random qsos may slip in, but that's clearly not in the plan.
Therefore: They violate the following rules:
>From the ARRL June VHF rules:
** 7.3. Multi-operator stations may not include QSOs with their own
operators except on frequencies higher than 2.3 GHz. Even then, a complete,
different station (transmitter, receiver and antenna) must exist for each
QSO made under these conditions.
(So, the qsos made with these captive rover stations above 2.3G might be
within the rules - maybe.)
>From the ARRL General contest rules:
** 3.7: All transmitters and receivers must be located within a 500-meter
diameter circle, excluding antennas.
>From the ARRL General VHF rules:
** 2.3.5.All Rovers are encouraged to adopt operating practices that allow
as many stations as possible to contact them.
(The same rules should apply to the pack/team rovers doing the grid
circling, but that's even worse and not the focus of this message.)
Is this perspective against independent rovers? Absolutely not.
Independent rovers are wonderful people who do what they do in order to make
the contest better and more fun for *all* other contest entrants - not just
one big multi-op. (Or in the case of the "pack rovers", not just for one of
their little happy group of road warriors so they can run up ridiculous
scores and allege that they are competing with the truly independent rover.)
While the intent of "helping" these rovers was purported to be altruistic
and generous, turning them into captives, who work virtually only the
multiop they are part of - is not only against the rules as listed above,
it's actually selfish of the multi team, and not generous at all. I can't
imagine why someone would want to be a captive rover, aside from the feeling
of belonging to a winning team, but then again, that is the problem here -
these captive rovers are in fact part of the winning multi-op team that they
are captive to. So, we're back to the rules violations listed above.
Denials aside, this is what's happening, and the rules need to address it
more explicitly so that there can be no debate or misunderstanding.
So what should these captive rovers do? Give up? Sell their equipment?
Heck no!
Instead, try some of these ideas:
Disengage from the multi-op team, and do your own thing.
Don't meet with the multi-op team as a member, don't plan your route with
them.
Go out to some really cool destinations, call CQ on 6m and 2m and work
stations there and then move up with those stations who can do the other
bands.
You'll still work your favorite multi-op on all bands, but you'll also work
a whole load of other people who may need those grids too.
You may win on your own! (Presuming that the silly pack situation is
addressed properly.)
That sort of operation would be fully in compliance with this rule:
** 2.3.5.All Rovers are encouraged to adopt operating practices that allow
as many stations as possible to contact them.
73,
Bob W5OV
EM13
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|