VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] How many people are affected by the new rule change?

To: "James Duffey" <JamesDuffey@comcast.net>, "VHF Contesting Reflector" <VHFContesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] How many people are affected by the new rule change?
From: "R. Michael West" <k6nc@saciplaw.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 03:00:04 +0000
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Nice factual analysis Duffy, and thankfully lacking the unnecessary hysteria of 
earlier postings.

73, Mike K6NC

-----Original Message-----
From: James Duffey [mailto:JamesDuffey@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 05:57 PM
To: 'VHF Contesting Reflector'
Cc: 'James Duffey'
Subject: [VHFcontesting] How many people are affected by the new rule change?

Rather than speculate, it is interesting to see who this affects. January 2008 
VHF contest, the first one with a Limited Rover entries: 1 station (out of 25), 
chose to include 1296 MHz instead of 222 MHz June 2008 VHF contest 5 out of 26 
entries chose to use another band than 222 MHz in the contest The winner, 
KG6TOA operated on 2.3, 3.4, 5.7 and 10 GHz. One station chose to operate 2304 
as the fourth band. The other 3 chose 1296 MHz over 222 MHz. September 2008 
Contest No stations out of 13 chose to use another band other than 222 MHz. 
Interestingly enough, all but one entry used all four bands. August 2008 UHF 
Contest 3 out of 7 entries chose to use bands other than the lowest 4. 
Interestingly enough, none of the limited rovers chose to use 902 MHz. So, 
limited rovers that want to stay competitive will have to get on 902 MHz. That 
will be my summer project. KG6TOA again used 2.3, 3.4, 5.7 and 10 GHz. The 
other 2 chose 10 GHz. It looks like the rule change will have a signif
 icant impact on UHF Limited Roving. It has a bigger impact than I thought on 
the June contest, and not too much on the January and September contest. DEMI 
should see a rush on 902 MHz boxes, well 6 or 7 maybe. :^)= If I look at the 
Classic Rover scores, which has larger numbers of participants, and hence 
better statistics, it looks like there are more QSOs made in the contest on 222 
MHz than on 1296 MHz. You have to go all the way down to the 15th place 
finisher before you find someone with more QSOs on 1296 MHz than 222 MHz. So on 
the face of it, it seems like choosing 1296 over 222 MHz may be a poor 
strategy. This makes sense, as it is a lot cheaper to generate power on 222 MHz 
than 1296 MHz. The rule change is not the end of the earth and may well level 
the competition in the Limited Rover class. I suspect that the committee did 
not really look at the UHF results too closely though. It will require 
equipment investments by those of us who rove in that contest if we want t
 o be competitive. - Duffey -- KK6MC James Duffey Cedar Crest NM 
_______________________________________________ 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>