[PaQSO] Discussion item

[ed.miske at kennametal.com]

Suggestion:

How about a (new?) Multi-Multi division. Whether you operate portable or 
rover or mobile or from home, if you do a Multi-Multi, you're competing 
against other multi-multi's ONLY, not against other rovers or other 
portables or whatever.

Without going to the NARC/PaQP web page to verify, I'm thinking that might 
mean another new plaque, but I think a sponsor could be found. 

The big "BUT" might be, are there enough multi-multi operations each year 
to make it reasonable/justifiable to offer a plaque.

Just some idle thoughts from the frozen tundra of Latrobe this morning.

Ed/WA3SES

paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net wrote on 12/14/2005 09:16:03 AM:

> My son and I have participated in the PA QSO party for the last 
> eleven years in the Rover Division.
> 
>   Two years ago a station started classifying himself as a Rover but
> never moved from one county line and operated as multi/multi.  This 
> did not seem to be in the spirit of the contest.  It allows a group 
> to set up massive antennas and multiple rigs while we are putting up
> 20 ft dipoles in trees on the side of the road.
> 
> I do agree that a separate division should be set up for multi/multi
> stations since single transmitter stations can can not easily 
> compete with multi transmitter stations. But this does not solve the
> Rover Division problem.
> 
> The way the rules now stand, any portable station multi single or 
> whatever can participate in the Rover division without ever having 
> to set up and tear down and "rove".
> 
> I recommend that the rules for the Rover division be modified to 
> require that a Rover station must put out at least 3 counties.  That
> way only Rovers could be in the Rover Division
> 
> Ray AB4YZ (Roanoke, VA)
> Ray Kn4SK (Tucson, AZ) 
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso