[ILHam] 2 Illinois sections

[Scott Millick]

With the length of the state for contesters we find that propagation is 
different particulary on the VHF bands   This along with the population in 
one area makes it real unfair for contesters whereas other states have 
multiple sections with the amount of hams we have   THis is my primary 
interest in multiple sections for Illinois. I would like to see the top 
third or half as the northern section and the south as the rest   An if 
this is not the place to bring it up where else? This has nothing to do 
with the present director but think how much more fun in contesting it 
would be to have the two sections. Look at the other states and comparisons 
and think about it

At 07:26 AM 9/24/2004, you wrote:
>While the numbers may indicate that based on population verses the amount of
>square miles in the state that the need might be there to have more than one
>section, how would you divide it?  IF you looked at the population compared
>to location in the other states that have more than one section, we would
>have just a Chicago section because of the density of the population there!
>Even beyond that, it still would not matter for this reflector for ilham.  I
>live near Springfield myself and there is no way I could check in to one of
>those nets either.  I would bet if you got a list of the hams that are
>subscribed to this reflector you would find that most of the subscribers are
>in the northern half of the state that may be near those repeaters.  You are
>getting messages about a VHF net in the Northern part of the state because
>someone submits it, not because we do not have more than one section and it
>has nothing to do with N9SH or the ARRL sections in the state.  JMO
>
>Tim Childers, KB9FBI
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Walter L. Wise" <w.l.wise at mindspring.com>
>To: <ilham at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 4:37 PM
>Subject: [ILHam] 2 Illinois sections
>
>
> > I think I must agree with Scott, K9SM.  I am always getting information
> > about VHF nets in the Northern part of the state.  There is no way I can
> > reach 300 miles on two meters.  The Southern part of the state needs to be
> > separate and conduct their own business.  While Sharon is doing a fine
>job,
> > it is unrealistic to send information about a VHF/UHF net being conducted
> > 300 miles away.
> >
> > Does anyone else agree with this?
> >
> > Wally, WA9BRQ
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILHam mailing list
> > ILHam at mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ilham
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ILHam mailing list
>ILHam at mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ilham



Scott K9SM
'God please save us from the Good People'

If you don't understand this you're part of the problem.

Remember other sayings

'You can't fix stupid'

'If you don't your know history you are doomed to repeat it'