[Rover] RE: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF+ contest proposals: input invited

[Tim ( KE3HT )]

First let me say that the ARRL has done a great thing by asking its
members what they think. In the past some of these things were decided
without much input. A vote (perhaps on the web or some other in
expensive medium) on some of these things might give the ARRL a better
perspective of the participants desires. E-mail tends to make a huge
mess of issues. Make specific proposals and then get a vote by vote
tally on the good and bad ideas.

My vote as KE3HT/R
1) YES Old rules sound good I guess. Before my time.

2) NO. Points for distance is great but you should
	encourage distance rover contacts rather than discouraging them.
	Who would want a 1 point rover if they can get a 3 point
base!Besides 
	the computer programs would need to rely on the "/R" being
recorded
	properly so it would be near impossible to detect the errors. 
	Some stations I work could log me with out the /R and get more
points
	since I may not work them from another grid. This would also
encourage
	rather than discourage CAPTIVE Rovers? Why would you want to do
that?
	Give the Rovers points like Base stations for Distance and you
would
	bust the captive rovers and the grid circler at the same time! 

3) NO. This would kill the June contest quite a bit. 
	It would be more like the 
	January contest where the rovers can't operate above 1296 anyhow
	(its too cold).
	ARRL already has an award for 50-432, why not just change that
to
	1296 if you want but don't kill the June contest. June would be
	like the January, August and 10gig contest's if 1296 was the
limit. 

4) OK.

5c) NO. Sounds like a big gunn put this one in. It would only help them.

New contest) NO. 10gig contest has better participation than the 
	August Contest? Your smoking something, right? 
	Kill the June AND August
	contest and you only have a September contest? Wow. Ok 
	you give us back a half a contest (2.3g and up) still not fair.

Awards#4) YES. I always wondered if a rover could get a VUCC. I like to
see defined rules for this.

My most important issue with these proposals is that as a Rover, if you
want to cut down on captive and circling rovers you should Encourage
everyone to work rovers not discourage working rovers! Then they don't
need to do these things? Making Rovers worth only one point kinda kills
the desire to work rovers and that results in stations choosing the
easier higher point contacts over the harder rovers. 

Wow, ARRL must be having a hard time with the dollar. Killing the JUNE
and AUGUST contests is kinda hard those of us spending time to build up
good stations. I have been working for 5 years now to build up a killer
Rover. I never figured I would only have ONE contest a year to use it
all in! Anyone know of other clubs? Is it time to start looking? I hear
CQ has something going on :-) 

Thanks for listening,,,
 
Tim KE3HT/R ARRL member
ke3ht@ke3ht.org
http:/www.ke3ht.org/rover


------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
A few more comments below:

The GOALS:
>      1) encourage more people to work more other people
>      2) encourage QSOs made over longer distances
>      3) encourage more people to join in and participate


> January VHF SS and June/September VHF QSO Parties
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> 1) Change Rover Rules
> and comments from both rovers and non-rovers, we have recommended
> reverting to the rover scoring rules originally established in 1991.
This is good...

> This change would encourage rovers to go to rarer 
> and more distant grids instead of staying closer to metropolitan
areas.
Remember this statement! It is refuted by K1KI below!

 > 2) QSO Point changes 
> The current rules provide for increasing QSO points as contacts are
made
> on
> higher bands plus additional multipliers on each band for each new
grid.
> We propose to change the values for QSO points for all three contests.
> Regardless of band you would receive two points for QSOs with your own
> grid and any adjacent grid, and three points for each QSO beyond that.

> QSOs with
> rover stations would count one QSO point each, regardless of distance.
Remember GOAL #2? This also hurts GOAL #1 since as a Rover I have no
reason to go to rare grids. It also makes it so when a station hear two
of us out there they will Never want to work the /R unless he is an easy
contact?

> This change would reward those who can make more distant QSOs, and it
Re-read what you just said above? It would discourage Rovers from going
to rare grids? Since Rovers aer only worth one point.

> 3) June VHF QSO Party 50-1296 MHz only
Yea, right, GOAL #3 is to increase participation, not reduce it! I would
have no reason to participate in the June contest? 

 
> 5) Other recommended changes (Jan/Jun/Sept)
> c)      Eliminate the rules that allow Multi-Operator stations to work
> their own operators on 2.3G and up.
This would probably only help the Big Gunn stations.

> New Microwave contest based on 10 GHz Cumulative - UHF contest dropped
> We recommend expanding the format of the successful 10G and Up
microwave
> contest and expand it to cover from 2.3 GHz and up.    The August UHF
> Contest would be discontinued after 2004.  It never reached a critical
> mass of support and entries.
The 10gig and up did? Are you reading CQ or QST?

> Awards
> ----------
> 4)      For VUCC awards on 50 through 1296 MHz and Satellite, all
contacts
> must be made from a location or locations within the
>               same grid locator or locations in different grid
locators no
> more than 200 kilometers apart [the approximate distance between
>               the corners of a grid square].  (Currently they have to
be
> made from the same grid square or from distances no more than
>               50 miles apart.)
As a Rover I like this one! I could never figure out the old VUCC rules
so I never even tried.


vhf-contest-proposal@arrl.org