VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] A distance scoring contest

To: kkaufhold@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] A distance scoring contest
From: Dan Evans <dan.evans@insightbb.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:32:13 -0500
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Sounds good Kevin, count me in.

73
Dan
-- 
Amateur Radio Emergency Service, Clark County Indiana. EM78el
K9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at:
<http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-books
Ask me how to join the Indiana Ham Mailing list! 



kevin kaufhold wrote:
> OK then.  I suggest that we form a yahoo user's group to work through the 
> issues in an analytical manner, as we can only do so much thru the din of a 
> reflector. It would amount to a working group for anyone interested (either 
> pro or con) on the topic of distance scoring.  Sort of a grass roots effort 
> to provide more of a focus to the discussion. We could check back and forth 
> thru the reflector to keep lines of communication up and hopefully develop a 
> consensus, one way or the other. If a consensus does build up, VUAC could use 
> whatever they feel appropriate in their own deliberations. 
>
> Pse let me know if you are interested in participating in such a discussion 
> group. If there is sufficient interest, I can set something up.   
>
>
> Kevin
> W9GKA
>
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 2/14/09, Jim Worsham <wa4kxy@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>   
>> From: Jim Worsham <wa4kxy@bellsouth.net>
>> Subject: RE: [VHFcontesting] A distance scoring contest
>> To: "'Ron Hooper'" <w4wa@alltel.net>, kkaufhold@yahoo.com
>> Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
>> Date: Saturday, February 14, 2009, 2:09 PM
>> As a member of the VUAC I have to say that Ron is 100% spot
>> on.  If the VHF
>> contesting community wants distance scoring in a contest
>> then there needs to
>> be a consensus developed by that community as to which
>> contest it is and how
>> it would work.  Several other members of the VUAC and I are
>> on this
>> reflector.  We are all paying attention, taking notes and
>> waiting for that
>> consensus to emerge.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim, W4KXY
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Ron Hooper
>> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2009 11:09 AM
>> To: kkaufhold@yahoo.com
>> Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] A distance scoring contest
>>
>> Hi Kevin
>>
>> Thanks for trying to get this group focused into a
>> direction that could
>> yield some results. I would like to include some basic
>> information.
>>
>> I think a lot of us old timers remember the reluctance of
>> the ARRL to make
>> rule changes based on some e-mails or letters without a
>> SUPPORTED
>> consensus. Prior to 2005/6, the ARRL CAC was the group to
>> contact and
>> hopefully would work toward a consensus to be presented to
>> the MSC which in
>> turn went to the BOD.
>>
>> Since then things have changed. The VHF community now has
>> its own advisory
>> committee called the VUAC. It is similar to the CAC but is
>> only concerned
>> with VHF & up contesting. This allows contesting issues
>> to be considered by
>> other VHF contesters and not by someone that has no idea
>> what is going on
>> first hand. The VUAC was created by the ARRL BOD and
>> answers to the Program
>> & Services Committee (PSC).
>>
>> The ARRL has placed a VUAC member in each of the ARRL
>> sections to solicit
>> input from the hams living in the division. The VUAC has a
>> chairperson to
>> gather the information from the other committee members and
>> submit it to the
>> PSC at different intervals during the year. These reports
>> can be found by
>> searching the ARRL site to see what issues are being
>> considered or acted on.
>>
>>
>> I know that my VUAC representative is on this list and
>> reads the threads
>> concerning the distance scoring and several other issues
>> that I am not
>> concerned with. There are probably several other VUAC
>> members on this list
>> and they can be be identified by going to
>> http://www.arrl.org/contests/vuac.html
>>
>> I assume you can also contact the ARRL in some way and they
>> will forward
>> your communication through to the proper person/s that
>> should get it.
>> Obviously, the more people that contact the ARRL the
>> quicker the distance
>> scoring rule change study can be impliment.
>>
>> I am in favor of distance scoring and would like to see the
>> issue studied by
>> the VUAC to determine if it could enhance the future VHF
>> and up contest.
>>
>> Ron W4WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 9:47 AM, kevin kaufhold
>> <kkaufhold@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> For everyone's information, the ARRL did use
>>>       
>> distance scoring in the
>> August
>>     
>>> UHF for one year in 1982. I believe it was referred to
>>>       
>> as RANGE. Look it
>> up
>>     
>>> in the old QST's! When the VUCC started in 1983,
>>>       
>> the UHF contest moved to
>>     
>>> the 1 x 2 grid squares as the multiplier. Between 1978
>>>       
>> when the UHF
>> started
>>     
>>> and 1981, a 1 x 1 grid square was used.  At the time,
>>>       
>> various versions of
>>     
>>> grid squares were considered to be an effort towards
>>>       
>> distance scoring,
>>     
>>> certainly an improvement over using states as a
>>>       
>> multiplier.
>>     
>>> As an experiment, using a 6 digit grid locator has a
>>>       
>> lot of appeal,
>>     
>>> especially if we start off in the August UHF. We have
>>>       
>> very few Joe 706's
>>     
>>> active in August, so the disruption to that contest
>>>       
>> would be minimal, I
>>     
>>> think. And, there was little problem when K9JK pushed
>>>       
>> 6 digits for the
>>     
>>> Spring Sprints. August has a lot of very experienced
>>>       
>> microwave enthusiasts
>>     
>>> who are quite used to 6 digits. And the UHF is small
>>>       
>> enough (in terms of
>>     
>>> logs) that it a distance scoring experiment would be
>>>       
>> managable. We could
>>     
>>> also put a max limit on a distance multiplier, to give
>>>       
>> some consideration
>> to
>>     
>>> EME without overly skewing the results.
>>>
>>> Distance scoring might also provide something of a
>>>       
>> disincentive to pack
>>     
>>> roving operations. To max points, they would have to
>>>       
>> increase power levels
>>     
>>> and run farther apart. I am sure they are capable of
>>>       
>> doing that, but they
>>     
>>> then would at least be encouraged to have
>>>       
>> "real" contacts rather than
>> QSO's
>>     
>>> literally within a few feet of each other.
>>>
>>> A parallel type of contest using both grids and
>>>       
>> distance as a scoring
>>     
>>> method would also be interesting to do for a few years
>>>       
>> to see which one
>> the
>>     
>>> VHF community really likes.  That might lead to more
>>>       
>> complexity however,
>> so
>>     
>>> I do not know if a parallel track would be worthwhile.
>>>
>>> I know the League's resources are stretched.
>>>       
>> Either logging programs would
>>     
>>> have to be modified for 6 digits, or the League would
>>>       
>> have to expand their
>>     
>>> scoring techniques from the 10G to encompass distance
>>>       
>> scoring in August
>> (or
>>     
>>> other contest).
>>>
>>> If people are really serious about this (rather than
>>>       
>> just chatting on the
>>     
>>> reflector), then I suggest an informal committee or
>>>       
>> delegation of some
>> sort
>>     
>>> be developed off reflector to study this more
>>>       
>> seriously.  What say you?
>>     
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>> W9GKA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>     
>
>
>       
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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