VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Limited Single Operator category

To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Limited Single Operator category
From: Duane Grotophorst <n9dg@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:30:08 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
--- Bob K0NR <k0nr-list@rwitte.com> wrote:
> I'd suggest making this category "any three bands"
> to avoid arbitrarily locking out 222 MHz (or any
> other band for that matter).
> Certainly, the IC-706/FT-100/etc folks will choose
> 50-144-432 MHz anyway. Is there a downside to this
> approach?

I would simply make it a 4 band category that
*includes* 222. We simply do not want to exclude 222
which would only strengthen the perception that it is
not a worthwhile band to have, not true. This January
it outperformed 432 for grids and was nearly the same
for Q's here. The competitive advantage for those
LSO's with 222 will not be totally overpowering for
those who don't.

I would also align the LSO power limits with the
barefoot power of the IC-706/FT-100/etc type radios.

Duane
N9DG

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>