[PaQSO] Rover vs. Mobile....

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

Personally, I would think that the only difference between a "portable" and
a "rover" is that the rover physically moves to another location, something
a portable can't or won't do.  So a "unirover" would by definition be a
"portable" not a "rover."

Or is that too logical?

73

-----Original Message-----
From: paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Ralph Matheny
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 10:00 PM
To: rnygren at epix.net
Cc: k3yd at aol.com; paqso at mailman.qth.net
Subject: re: [PaQSO] Rover vs. Mobile....


I have a name for those who enter the rover category but only operate in
one location: "Unirovers".  They are really "county expeditions" and are
really just like anybody else with a fixed station.  However, they do no
harm, but they are not the same animal as what we do as "rover" stations.

Ralph Matheny
K8RYU
207 Gibbons Place
Marietta Ohio  45750
mathenyr at marietta.edu






On Fri, 11 May 2007, rnygren at epix.net wrote:

> In the 2006 results I note two "Rovers" who "Roved" to only one location.
Would this not be better classified as "Portable" operation?
>
> Bob N3RN
>
>
>>
>> From: k3yd at aol.com
>> Date: 2007/05/10 Thu PM 04:20:39 EST
>> To: paqso at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: re: [PaQSO] Rover vs. Mobile....
>>
>> My understanding is that a MOBILE station is capable of operating while
>> in motion, but for safety sake is usually better operated while
>> parked--unless the operator is NOT the driver. The antenna(s) are
>> mounted on the vehicle and move with it.
>>
>> A ROVER is a station which temporarily deploys/uses antennas which are
>> not attached to the vehicle (i.e., a dipole in a tree, a beam on a pipe
>> mast). The station can be in the vehicle or set up on a table or
>> whatever. When the ROVER moves to another location, the antenna is
>> typically taken down and then erected at the next location. I suppose
>> you could abandon antennas at each ROVER location, but some might call
>> that littering, and it would become expensive after several counties.
>>
>> Anybody have a different spin on this?
>>
>> 73 de k3yd
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: n3zip at hotmail.com
>> To: paqso at mailman.qth.net
>> Sent: Thu, 10 May 2007 3:06 PM
>> Subject: [PaQSO] Rover vs. Mobile....
>>
>>
>> Mike, et. al.,
>>
>> Just wondering if you would be so good as to post the difference(s),
>> whether by rule or matter of opinion, between operating in the Rover
>> vs. Mobile categories? My take is something like this: Operating
>> 'Mobile' is driving and operating from the vehicle, mostly but not
>> entirely while in motion, and picking up counties as you go; whereas
>> operating 'Rover' would be driving to a location, setting up a station,
>> making contacts, breaking down, and going to the next county, etc.
>> Although I realize some rovers (especially serious VHF guys) tend to
>> have most of their station constructed around their vehicle, they still
>> must stop and deploy for maximum effectiveness, while a mobile
>> installation, in my take on it, is designed around operating
>> "on-the-go".
>>
>> All opinions are welcome, and please bear in mind that I have not sat
>> and compared the rules for each category side-by-side.
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free
>> from AOL at AOL.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> PaQSO mailing list
>> PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso
>
_______________________________________________
PaQSO mailing list
PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso