So what happened to the "special" committee the ARRL asked to look at the
rules? I bet they didn't like the results so nothing happened. I'm appalled
with their inaction.
Greg
vhfcontesting-request@contesting.com wrote: Send VHFcontesting mailing list
submissions to
vhfcontesting@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
vhfcontesting-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
vhfcontesting-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of VHFcontesting digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: One Missing Rover (Eric Smith)
2. One Missing Rover (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
3. Re: One Missing Rover (Mike (KA5CVH) Urich)
4. Re: VHFcontesting Digest, Vol 56, Issue 7 (Rick R)
5. Multi-op rover (Rick R)
6. Re: One Missing Rover (John Geiger)
7. Re: One Missing Rover (Nate Duehr)
8. Re: One Missing Rover (Nate Duehr)
9. Dream Rover (was: Re: One Missing Rover) (Nate Duehr)
From: "Eric Smith" <kb7dqh@donobi.net>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 14:01:51 -0700
To: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@lcisp.com>, <Jimk8mr@aol.com>,
<vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
AMEN! I like the "shore power" rule change also, then I
got to thinking about it for just a second and realized
that any abuses such as visiting inactive fixed stations in
different grids and running with your own callsign is
covered in other rules...
Imagine the entire K8GP operation operating from two or
three mountaintops during a contest... With just a bit of
extra effort they could pull it off!
Hmmm... W2SZ/1 ROVER???? They already have the gear set
up in utilty trucks, so setting the antennas up on tower
trailers isn't too much of a stretch...
To that end, four ARRL UHF contests ago, I ran my latest
"portable amateur radio station"
as a single op rover. Pictures of the vehicle are on the
ARRL website in the soapbox area. Easiest way to find them
is to "google" my callsign.
I have even taken two other operators along on two
different January VHF contests. I did not send in the logs
as this would have violated current rules, but, this was a
good way to test the gear "all at once" and found that it
is indeed possible to run modestly high power on several
bands at once with antennae in close proximity and not tear
up the stations not actively transmitting too much. Some
increase in noise floors with certain equipment
combinations did occur, subsequently changes in the station
equipment has minimized this greatly.
My current configuration provides for a driver, 6 meter
operator, two meter operator, 222/432 Mhz operator,
903-10368 operator, and two other "hot-racking" relief
drivers or radio operators. The 222/432 rigs are separate,
so that operator could conceivably have his hands full on
occasion, but I think this evenly distributes the typical
VHF contest workload evenly among the operators, and could
keep the stations on the air thru an entire 30 hour contest
period.
How's that for "adopting operating practices that allow as
many stations as possible to contact (the rover)"???
Eric
KB7DQH
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 18:46:32 -0000
"John Geiger" wrote:
> Also,eliminate the requirement that a rover can have only
> 1 or 2 operators
> (which includes the driver). Can't see the logic in that
> one either.
>
> 73s John AA5JG
>
From: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <mike@ka5cvh.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:05:30 -0500
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
On 8/8/07, Joshua M. Arritt wrote:
> spite Exxon/Mobile,
Mike wrote
Don't forget Occidental Petroleum Too, sorry I digress.
--
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
http://harriscountyares.org
From: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <mike@ka5cvh.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
CC: vhfcontesting@contesting.com, Jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:16:52 -0500
To: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@lcisp.com>
On 8/8/07, John Geiger wrote:
> Also,eliminate the requirement that a rover can have only 1 or 2 operators
> (which includes the driver). Can't see the logic in that one either.
Mike wrote
Agreed, single op, multi op, what is so difficult about that.
Some ideas I'd like to do.
http://www.ka5cvh.com/radio/vhf/vehicles.pdf
--
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com
http://harriscountyares.org
From: "Rick R" <rick1ds@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] VHFcontesting Digest, Vol 56, Issue 7
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 18:00:44 -0400
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
I thought about this for a while as I have been a VHF rover for 20+ years. I
do have a dedicated rover van for the past 7 years, although I did a set-up
in the XYL's station wagon prior to each contest before I got the van. I
live in an antenna resticted community. before moving to current QTH I lived
in a seriously disadvantaged VHF QTH
Sometimes I bite the bullet and spend up to $500 for a weekend--gas, meals,
2 nites in motels, tolls...It's sort of like a mini-vacation weekend, with
the main feature being RADIO!
Sometimes I fill the tank once, drive to the local 4 corners and operate
from those 4 grid corners.
Sometimes I just go about 1 mile from the home QTH and operate from a
reasonable spot as a fixed station, time spent depends on conditions and
activity.
Sometimes I stay home if I don't have much contest time, or the weather
makes travel impossible (like January) and operate from the very limited
home station in the house with stealth antennas in the attic, but since
performance is poor, only work a few of the locals.
Although I can't twist anyone's arm, there's always the opportunity to take
a buddy and ask to share some costs, or limit the territory covered and
enjoy what your budget allows. Or perhaps the local club or VHF'ers can
help subsidize some of your travel costs. As we often see feedback from so
many VHF'ers, "Rovers make this so much fun!"
By all means, participate and make some QSOs with your VHF confreres. 73,
Rick, K1DS/R
_________________________________________________________________
Booking a flight? Know when to buy with airfare predictions on MSN Travel.
http://travel.msn.com/Articles/aboutfarecast.aspx&ocid=T001MSN25A07001
From: "Rick R" <rick1ds@hotmail.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Multi-op rover
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 18:13:58 -0400
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
I have lobbied for many years to have a separate category for 1-op rovers vs
multi-op rovers.
The rationale is that 1 person does not have the capability to do what 2
people can in terms of driving and operating, not to mention the physical
needs sometimes involved in set-up and breakdown at each stop, if that's the
kind of rover you have.
And the two ops can be running QSOs simultaneously on two bands, but one op
can only operate 1 band at a time.
I certainly would not mind having a separate category for the multi-op
rover, just like we have a category for the multi-op fixed station. But
let's not think that it's a fair match for 1 person alone to compete with
what 2 or more can! 73, Rick, K1DS/R
_________________________________________________________________
See what you?re getting into?before you go there
http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_preview_0507
From: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@lcisp.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 23:13:26 -0000
To: "Eric Smith" <kb7dqh@donobi.net>, <Jimk8mr@aol.com>,
<vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
One think that I have been thinking of recently is that we need a mobile
category for the VHF contests-for people who go mobile but who don't meet
the rover requirements. With the proliferation of HF/VHF/UHF mobile rigs,
we may have the guy who is out running errands on saturday and sunday
afternoon, and who turns on 6 to find the band open so he makes a few
contest Qs. Or the ham who operates while driving back and forth to
Grandmother's house for the weekend.
If neither of these travel to another grid square they fall into the black
hole of entries: They can't enter as a rover because they didn't activate
more than 1 grid, and they can't enter as a single op because of the 300
meter rule. Do we really want to tell these potential contesters that we
don't care about them and that their QSOs don't count for anything?
73s John AA5JG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Smith"
To: "John Geiger" ; ;
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:01 PM
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
> AMEN! I like the "shore power" rule change also, then I
> got to thinking about it for just a second and realized
> that any abuses such as visiting inactive fixed stations in
> different grids and running with your own callsign is
> covered in other rules...
>
> Imagine the entire K8GP operation operating from two or
> three mountaintops during a contest... With just a bit of
> extra effort they could pull it off!
>
> Hmmm... W2SZ/1 ROVER???? They already have the gear set
> up in utilty trucks, so setting the antennas up on tower
> trailers isn't too much of a stretch...
>
> To that end, four ARRL UHF contests ago, I ran my latest
> "portable amateur radio station"
> as a single op rover. Pictures of the vehicle are on the
> ARRL website in the soapbox area. Easiest way to find them
> is to "google" my callsign.
>
> I have even taken two other operators along on two
> different January VHF contests. I did not send in the logs
> as this would have violated current rules, but, this was a
> good way to test the gear "all at once" and found that it
> is indeed possible to run modestly high power on several
> bands at once with antennae in close proximity and not tear
> up the stations not actively transmitting too much. Some
> increase in noise floors with certain equipment
> combinations did occur, subsequently changes in the station
> equipment has minimized this greatly.
>
> My current configuration provides for a driver, 6 meter
> operator, two meter operator, 222/432 Mhz operator,
> 903-10368 operator, and two other "hot-racking" relief
> drivers or radio operators. The 222/432 rigs are separate,
> so that operator could conceivably have his hands full on
> occasion, but I think this evenly distributes the typical
> VHF contest workload evenly among the operators, and could
> keep the stations on the air thru an entire 30 hour contest
> period.
>
> How's that for "adopting operating practices that allow as
> many stations as possible to contact (the rover)"???
> Eric
> KB7DQH
>
>
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 18:46:32 -0000
> "John Geiger" wrote:
> > Also,eliminate the requirement that a rover can have only
> > 1 or 2 operators
> > (which includes the driver). Can't see the logic in that
> > one either.
> >
> > 73s John AA5JG
> >
>
From: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:48:54 -0600
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
John Geiger wrote:
> Also,eliminate the requirement that a rover can have only 1 or 2 operators
> (which includes the driver). Can't see the logic in that one either.
Multi-op rover from an old school bus and a tower trailer.
I would love that. :-)
Nate WY0X
From: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] One Missing Rover
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:58:38 -0600
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
John Geiger wrote:
> One think that I have been thinking of recently is that we need a mobile
> category for the VHF contests-for people who go mobile but who don't meet
> the rover requirements. With the proliferation of HF/VHF/UHF mobile rigs,
> we may have the guy who is out running errands on saturday and sunday
> afternoon, and who turns on 6 to find the band open so he makes a few
> contest Qs. Or the ham who operates while driving back and forth to
> Grandmother's house for the weekend.
>
> If neither of these travel to another grid square they fall into the black
> hole of entries: They can't enter as a rover because they didn't activate
> more than 1 grid, and they can't enter as a single op because of the 300
> meter rule. Do we really want to tell these potential contesters that we
> don't care about them and that their QSOs don't count for anything?
It's a non-problem.
Even if they send in a log, they have no chance at scoring high enough
to even show up on the lists in the magazine, with that short/small of
an operation, and they probably know that.
If there's are examples of logs sent in from such operators, what was
done with them? Were they simply treated as checklogs or were they
scored? I'm betting they're scored anyway. Is there a check in the
robot to see if a rover really operated from two grids?
Other than folks who "usually contest" but aren't that day, who send
them in as check logs, I'd be surprised if anyone in the examples you
gave above are even truly sending in logs.
Nate WY0X
From: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Dream Rover (was: Re: One Missing Rover)
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 18:03:03 -0600
To: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <mike@ka5cvh.com>,
vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Mike (KA5CVH) Urich wrote:
> Some ideas I'd like to do.
> http://www.ka5cvh.com/radio/vhf/vehicles.pdf
A radio/TV truck with hydraulic mast and/or a cellular-on-wheels (COW)
truck would already have a built in "tower"... you could put one of
those on your vehicle wish list.
Nate WY0X
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
---------------------------------------------------------
Greg Chartrand - W7MY
Richland, WA.
DN-06IF
W7MY Home Page:
http://webpages.charter.net/w7my/
---------------------------------
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|