[NLRS] NLRS response to VHF+ Subcommittee

[jcplatt1@mmm.com]

I've been having some problems with my home AOL NLRS email.   I sent this
from home last night but have not seen it appear.    This is a resend from
my work account.

Based on recent discussions with NLRS members, we may indeed have general
agreement on many of the proposed rule changes offered by the ARRL's MSC
VHF+ Subcommittee.   For those who may not be familiar with their proposal
you can check it out a
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/02/26/2/ .   The subcommittee has
set a date of March 7th for receiving feedback.

Below is our club response that I am proposing.  I've purposely kept the
response at a high level.   Please let me know if you object and/or have
suggested changes .... based on your responses I would like to send this in
on March 7th.

In addition I encourage all interested parties to provide their own
feedback as well.   There is an email link to do this at the ARRL website
referenced above.

73, Jon
W0ZQ



The Northern Lights Radio Society offers the following response to the Feb
26, 2004 letter outlining proposed rule changes to the VHF+ contests:

Do Not:
   Eliminate the UHF contests.   We like it.   Finds ways to increase
   participation.
   Make the June contest 50 thru 1296 only.   When 6m dries up we want to
   play on the high bands.
   Add other bands to the current 10 GHz & Up Contest.    Leave it alone as
   its lots of fun as is.
   Relax the current criteria for awards such as VUCC.   It cheapens the
   goal and the current challenges are achievable.
   Restrict rover scoring to just 1 point.   Points should be the same as
   fixed stations and we want to encourage roving.
   Make QSO points the same regardless of frequency.   Contacts are more
   difficult on higher bands and we want to encourage their use.

Do:
   Change to the old rovers rules.   Although we are not excited about
   leaving rovers out of club aggregate scoring we understand the reasoning
   behind it.
   Add a new Limited Single Op category for the Jan/June/Sept contest to
   encourage newbies.
   Simplify the low power class, but we need to apply this to 902 and up as
   well.
   Change score to distance base, but its not clear if the current proposal
   is the best, plus how to consider distance for 6m vs 1296, etc.
   Eliminate the rule that allows muli-ops to work each other on 2.3 & up.
   Allow DX to DX contacts for points & multipliers.

Think about:
   Strengthening the rules around not allowing captive rovers and grid
   circling.
   Adding a FM only class.
   Adding 222 to the new Limited Single Op category (to encourage use of
   that band) so that it would be 6, 2, 222, and 432.
   Redefining the definition for low power vs high power for 902 and up.
   How we can allow rover scores to add to club aggregate scoring.

--- End --