VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] 2016 ARRL UHF Contest Cancelled

To: "Joshua M. Arritt" <jarritt@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 2016 ARRL UHF Contest Cancelled
From: Mark Spencer <mark@alignedsolutions.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 11:56:06 -0800
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Please see below:

73 Mark S
VE7AFZ

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 11, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Joshua M. Arritt <jarritt@vt.edu> wrote:
> 
> I also read it as: "Aug UHF to be resched", with eager anticipation.
> 

That may be but a scheduled UHF contest in August of 2016 is not going to 
happen.  I consider that particular occurrence of that event has now been 
cancelled.

> In Mid-Atl, there is a popular hamfest that coincides with the UHF 'Test.  So 
> a re-sched would ////perhaps//// be a good thing at least regionally, at 
> least minimally.
> 
> 
> QUESTIONS TO THE GROUP:
> 
> 1.) 10GHz event is multi-weekend; participate both weekends from two 
> mult/grids for optimum "fun".  Do you feel a similar format would suit UHF 
> 'Test?
> 

I'm doubtful I can devote two weekends in a row to VHF+ contesting.

> 2.) Would  'test be better if it were "rolled into" the 10GHz+ 'Test (where 
> liason station Qs could count for mults)?     Would this increase 10GHz 
> activity?
> 

Sorry I don't have any (amateur radio) gear for bands higher than 1.2 GHz so I 
can't comment.

> 3.) Portable ops: How many portable UHF "Big Guns" are out there, who haul 
> heavy equip to mtntops for each Aug 'Test?  How many of you consider 
> yourselves "lighter weight"?  In other words, for your operation, is a 
> 2-weekend UHF+ test more, or less gear-intensive than a full-blown June, 
> Sept, or Jan contest?  How much so?  What do you feel your participation 
> level would be?   Or in still other terms, would a two-weekend event increase 
> the number of hours you might be QRV on UHF+?


I hauled moderately complex gear for 222, 432 and 1296 to two mountain sides 
during the last UHF contest.  (10 to 15 foot long yagis, amps, preamps, rotor 
etc..)Setup time for me is approx two hours and is basically the same as my 
VHF+ station for the June and Sept contests.   The 432 and 1296 setup takes the 
bulk of the time.   I probably a bit more effort and attention to detail into 
1296 during the Aug UHF contest than during the other contests.

I suspect I would make a focused effort on one weekend even if the contest 
lasted two weekends.
> 
> 4.) Again for portables:  How many UHF 'Test enthusiasts carry 2m with them 
> during the 'test anyway for liaison work?   In other UHF-only or 
> higher-freq-exclusive events, how much of your gear payload is invested in 
> lower bands not being used in the event? To the point: Have we reached a 
> point in modern, compact, capable gear availability where including all 
> bands, even in a limited fashion, would help increase participation or 
> satisfaction?  What if these "UHF Tests" focused higher point/mult values to 
> the UHF+ bands, but still gave some credit for your liaison station?


I find I use 432 as the liaison band for the other bands in the UHF contest.   
I had 2M gear last contest but don't recall using it.
> 
> 5.) Fall microwave sprints seem to promise slightly better propagation 
> enhancement probability than Spring.  (yes?)  Can we imagine the Fall (or 
> Spring, or both) Microwave sprint coinciding with a more major UHF+ event?  
> What implications are involved in such an event mash-up?
> 

Don't know. Sorry
> 6.) Do we have too many or too few operating events focused on UHF+?  Do you 
> feel consolidation of events as suggested above are worth consideration 
> (i.e., more dense participation in a more inclusive event), or would event 
> consolidation end up hurting participation (i.e., fewer weekends with higher 
> stations-QRV probability)?
> 
> 

I personally believe one focused 222 and up contest per year is enough for me.

> 
> 
> I'm personally split -- can see two sides of a valid debate -- on each 
> question.   I have no preferences.  Rather, I mostly feel as though this 
> group can use these points of discussion to provide critical input to CAC re: 
> any restructuring of "The Contest Formerly Known as 'Aug UHF'".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VY 73,
>         - Josh / KF4YLM
> 
> 
> 
>> On 11.03.2016 12:35, Ward Silver wrote:
>> The CAC does not have final say over anything and only considers HF 
>> contesting issues, anyway.  Reading the announcement carefully, the issues 
>> are being handled by an ad hoc VHF Contesting Revitalization Committee and 
>> the board's Programs & Services Committee made the final decision.
>> 
>> The ad hoc committee is collecting input on what kind of UHF/microwave 
>> contests the community wants, when they should be held, etc.  While there 
>> may be some disagreement about the order in which things are being done, 
>> there is significant interest and goodwill for UHF/microwave contests.  I 
>> suggest that you think of what kind of contest you would like to see, write 
>> it up, and submit it to the email address N0JK provided.  Consider what 
>> would attract new hams to give these contests a try, what would drive 
>> technical innovation, is a single time period the right way to go, should 
>> there be new categories or styles of operation?  Put those thinking caps on 
>> and send in your ideas.
>> 
>> In case there is any confusion, I do work with the writeup authors but I am 
>> *not* a member of the ad hoc committee.
>> 
>> 73, Ward N0AX
>> 
>>> On 3/11/2016 11:05 AM, vhfcontesting-request@contesting.com wrote:
>>> ARRL Ad Hoc Subcommittee on VHF and Above Revitalization made the 
>>> recommendation to cancel the UHF contest. Last year they asked for input on 
>>> how "to expand participation in the August UHF contest. To that end they 
>>> are asked for responses to the following questions:
>>> ? Are you now active on UHF?
>>> ? How often do you presently operate in the ARRL UHF contest ? never, 
>>> occasional, or always?
>>> ? If you do not presently participate, why not?
>>> ? If you do not presently participate, what changes might compel you to 
>>> participate in the future?
>>> ? What are your ideas for attracting more amateurs to UHF operation in 
>>> general?
>>> 
>>> Please submit your comments by October 1, 2015 to:vhf-input@arrl.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Did you comment?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> They still may be open to comments. The CAC though likely had the final say 
>>> on the cancellation.
>>> 
>>>  - N0JK
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>