Hello fellow VHF contesters. As you may know, I am the Dakota Division VUAC representative. A full list of who is your ARRL Division VUAC representative can be found at http://www.arrl.org/contests/v
Excellent, excellent excellent! My only suggestion is a minor one and that is with regard to the bands available to Limited Rovers. The Kenwood TS2000 can be had with 902 capability so its an all-in-
I believe you meant to say 1.2 GHz. 900 MHz is not an option for the Kenwood TS-2000 radio, AFAIK. Nate WY0X --Original Message-- From: vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:vhfcontesting-boun
I?have a ?TS-2000Xs and am?a member?of 2 TS-2000 reflectors. I've never heard about 902mhz capabiltity for this radio. What is the source of your info? Could you be thinking of the 1296 capability of
Sorry... I meant 1296. My error. My point was that the TS2000 has 4 band capability in single box and that seems to fit in with the ARRL's goal with the Limited Rover class. Steve ___________________
Thanks for sharing Jon. All this proposal appears to do is discourage people who want to operate 7 or more band rovers and work other rovers with that many bands. Sure, it'll force the grid-circlers
What? Do what you feel is right, but I'm seriously confused. How does this "discourage people who want to operate 7 bands..."? I've often asked others to post how may rover to rover contacts they hav
I like the proposal other than the 30 QSO limit. I can see where two 10 band rovers could cross at a grid corner and easily hit 40 QSO's and then go on their own way. This would throw them into unlim
VUAC representatives, I sincerely feel that the 30 QSO limit for Rover to Rover contacts is too restrictive. I am okay with the current 100 QSO limit and ask the VUAC to NOT approve the proposed 30 Q
I LOVE the 30 QSO limit AND the 50% limit and hope they get adopted. I like Mike and compete against him in this division. I'm glad he's out there. But I never get close to 30 Q's with the same rover