[NLRS] Designing the perfect State VHF Sprint...

[Thomas, KB0DCO]

Hello,

                First time on the NLRS reflector. I had a nice talk with 
Bruce about the contest awhile ago.

Bruce Richardson wrote:

>For a NLRS club activity, a goal like "work all VHF'ers in the club seven
>state region" might be a goal.  Or, like the MNQP, Minnesota works Minnesota
>and the world and the world works Minnesota.  Another goal would be to
>exercise our little used VHF/UHF/SHF bands.  Or a different goal would just
>to get all the regional operators out and playing on the bands that are
>widely used.  Depending on how we structure Qpts and multipliers (scoring)
>would depend on the behaviors and goals we'd achieve.
>
>Propagation differences:  Kinda like HF works differently within the region,
>our VHF and up bands work varyingly.  No VHF bands seem to reach out and
>touch all counties reliably like 40m can.  Although beams pointing at beams
>on 2m or 222 has the best chance.  Depending on which bands are included
>causes one to explore what is and is not possible during the sprint.
>
>Multipliers:  Grids? Counties? Another scheme?  Regionally, I like counties.
>
>Qpts:  Work VHF'ers once per band? Once per mode? Differing points per mode?
>Unlike HF, where there are distinct sub-bands for phone and cw, we use both
>modes (and FM where appropriate) throughout the weak-signal portion of the
>band.  Signal strength (or S/N) seems to determine whether CW or Phone is
>used.  Phone generally seems to be faster.  Should the decreased speed of CW
>be rewarded with a different weighting or is just completing the extra QSO
>(and Qpt) enough reward?
>

        I like would like to see more activity on FM. During the MN QSO 
party our group turned off the radio due to no activity. I think It will 
get more people involved if there are more things to work for in one 
contest.

         I would like to see some sort of scoring for working the modes. 
(As to the modes of CW, FM, AM and USB, excluding data transmissions. 
{AM would be hard challenge hi hi, "Try doing it the old way"}, As to 
the freqs.... (what freqs. to use) and the wheres (as to points for 
grids and counties). Like: (FM so many points, USB so many points, CW so 
many points. On the 6 meter, 2 meter, 220 band, 432/440 band and etc.) 

        Call it the "6 Meter to Light - All Mode QSO Party". You might 
not be able to do AM mode towards the Light end, but that could be 
defined how far up the spectrum you could use "AM".

         I would also like a contest to state which Freqs. which freqs. 
to focus on. As where to look on FM. As an example: like " Use freqs. 
146.400, 146.430, 146.460, 146.490 for contesting" and the others freqs. 
like 146.550 and 146.580  and in the 147.xxx areas of the band would be 
reserved for non contesters. So those who don't want to take part in the 
contest will have a place to go.       
    
Bands: Should a guy with many bands automatically smoke someone who has 
fewer bands but achieves additional QSO's while staying on bands he has? 
Is there a way to level the playing field for one sprint? Could we give 
up reinforcing have "all" bands for one contest?
Exchanges: Is exchanging "multiplier" info enough or is there some other 
piece of info (like name) that would make the exchanges fun and interesting?

>Well, with that as a preamble, I'm torn between two types of sprints:
>
>1. All band sprint.  Multipliers: Counties gained (+outside states) acquired
>the first time worked on any band.  Work operators once per band (any mode)
>1 Qpt per contact (any band).  Exchange County (or outside state) and name.
>
>2. Three band sprint 6, 2, and 432.  Multipliers: Counties gained (+outside
>states) acquired the first time worked on any band.  Work operators once per
>band (any mode) 1 Qpt per contact (any band).  Exchange County (or outside
>state) and name.
>
>What I like about option one is that it encourages additional bands for
>additional Qpts, but it doesn't guarantee that a guy with more bands will
>automatically smoke those who don't have additional bands.  This is based on
>VHF+ activity levels in the region and the additional fiddle-factor with
>increasing frequency.
>
>What I like about option two is that it forces us all to play in the same
>basic sandbox while still having us explore propagation differences between
>50 and 432.
>
        I agree on the option 2. I helps focuses on just those band that 
most hams have. Then the multipliers can be the modes of CW, AM, FM and 
USB.  Most hams have FM. Then down the line would be those who have the 
all mode radios. Which could do the CW, AM, and USB modes. Since there 
are more FMers than the ones with all mode radios... Then maybe FM = 1 
point, USB = 2 points, CW = 3 points and then AM = 4 points.  As AM is 
not used much on the VHF or UHF bands and CW is not being used now as 
much as it used to be. (This is just an observation as more and more new 
hams don't want to do CW.)

>What are your thoughts on what would make a fun club or regional activity
>sprint?  If we come to a consensus, and if appropriate to be worked into the
>MNQP, perhaps the MNQP will remain our annual club sprint activity.  Or
>alternatively, we can come up with our event.
>
>What are some other things to consider?
>
>Bruce Richardson - W9FZ
>  
>
          I would like to see the hams who Rover and others who do the 
Jan. and June 6 meter to light contests on a regular basis hold a 
conference in the metro area to discus creating a new contest for MN or 
to propose one for the ARRL.

          Looking forward to hearing some other ideas.

Thomas
KB0DCO