VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] roving check logs

To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] roving check logs
From: "Army Curtis - AE5P" <ae5p@suddenlink.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:00:10 -0600
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Well, time to weigh in I guess. It is very interesting to note that the
folks screaming foul the loudest here are located in the east, land of many
fixed stations. Shame ya'll can't try roving out here in the hinterlands,
where there might be all of a dozen or so fixed stations that are sometimes
within range.

I operate a pretty serious 8 band rover, with amps and gain antennas on most
bands. We don't have high mountain peaks to work from, but we do have plenty
of trees to absorb RF. It is just tremendous fun to spend a weekend covering
10 to 12 grids, and manage less than 100 Q's. So, now we rove with 3 to 4
other rovers, and manage more than 500 Q's. Do we still work the fixed
stations? Absolutely! Will we continue to go out if some cry babies manage
to get the rules changed to ban our many rover to rover contacts? Doubtful!

The "intent of the rules" is, or should be, to encourage more activity on
the VHF/UHF bands. Hello, that is exactly what we are doing.

AF6O said it very well earlier today: "Perhaps it could be explicitly
written in the rules, something like .........this rule applies only to west
coast rovers and not to North East rovers."

Get a life guys. It's a contest. No it's not fair. Life isn't fair. Live
with it, and make the best of it. We are. 

Okay, flame retardant suit is on. Please, no foaming at the mouth Frank.

Army - AE5P/R



-----Original Message-----
From: vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Steve Clifford
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:54 PM
To: frank bechdoldt
Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] roving check logs

I think you're missing how this is worded.  It would allow up to 30 contacts
with any single other rover.  You could have 29 with one guy, 25 with
another and 30 with another.  As long as your total rover to rover QSOs
didn't exceed 50% of all your QSOs, you'd still be Limited or Classic.  If
you exceed the 50% or if one of those went over 30 for an individual rover,
you'd be moved into Unlimited.

I like it.  The reason I like it is because of the 50% thing.  I might have
set the value lower than that, but can live with that.  If you go out with a
group or "pack" but you still make efforts to grab base stations, you're
operating within what I think the intent is.  You're contacting as many
stations as possible.  I've got no beef with that.

I'll be very interested to see how long this takes to put into effect.  I'd
love to see it in play by the June contest.

Steve
K4GUN/R

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:10 PM, frank bechdoldt <k3uhf@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> I suppose all contacts over 30 could be sent in a check log as to not to
> punish a rover who has less than 30 vs a rover who has more than 30
> contacts.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows LiveT: Keep your life in sync.
>
>
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_0220
09
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.234 / Virus Database: 270.10.20/1943 - Release Date: 02/10/09
07:20:00

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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