Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

More SOTA not less


I don’t get involved with the politics off SOTA and I never have but apologies if I have missed something but I feel I have to ask this question.

Why did NP-031 Birks Fell and NP-032 Cracoe Fell replace NP-021 Horse Head Moor and NP-025 Thorpe Fell Top respectively?

If Im correct I believe that it was done because of a few feet/metres difference in height though could NP-021 and NP-025 not remain as they were and NP-031 and NP-032 added to the database?

There is no doubt a viable answer to this but surely most activators and probably most chasers would agree that the more summits the better for everyone concerned regarding SOTA.

Chris 2E0FSR


In reply to 2E0FSR:
Effectively, in SOTA terms, Horsehead and Birks are the same hill.
There is not a drop of 150m between them. The RHB resurveyed them and
found Birks was slightly higher than Horshead so is the true summit.
The same happened with Cracoe and Thorpe.

Roger G4OWG


In reply to 2E0FSR:

Hi, Chris. The simple answer is that the list of summits used by SOTA in the UK is tied to the list of Marilyns published and maintained in the RHB, and when they change, we change. Usually the change of summit makes the previous summit invalid because it no longer meets the definition of a Marilyn, being dominated by the new summit. This is explained in more detail on the website.


Brian G8ADD


In reply to 2E0FSR:
A very good question Chris… and I see that Roger and Brian beat me to a reply but I’ve typed this anyway so I’ll post it. :slight_smile:

You may be aware that the G association uses the Marilyns list i.e. peaks with a prominence of 150m or more. These peaks (NP-031 and NP-032) were resurveyed and found to be higher than the ones replaced (NP-021 and NP-025) and therefore the 150m prominence condition was no longer satisfied as they were “parented” by the new ones and removed from the Marilyns list (and no longer qualified as SOTA summits).

73 Marc G0AZS


In reply to 2E0FSR:

more summits the better

Indeed. More as long as they meet the criteria in the first place whatever the criteria may be. The problem with England is it’s not that spiky a place so many of the changes will be due to more accurate surveying moving the peak from one place to another. Many of the hills are rounded lumps with undulating plateaus at the summit. Most time the summit moves from one indistinct bit to another. Hardly awe inspiring but it does mean that “complete-ists” have to revist the area to bag the new reference.

However, North of the border, the land is spikier and we will have a new summit to add soon. Again this has been found due to more accurate surveying. The prominence was nearly 150m (ISTR 148m) so it was nearly a Marilyn. Surveying carried out in private by members of the RHB group showed it did indeed meet Marilyn requirements and once officially published the GM list will be updated. The downside is it’s only a 1pt summit on the far side of Arran so I don’t expect a rush of activators heading out to bag it in the near future.

One point the other commenters have not made is that when a summit is deleted there is normally a fair bit of notice given. This is so that people have some chance of activating/chasing the summit before it is deleted.

GM Association Manager.


In reply to 2E0FSR:

Chris, Sota is goverened by a third party, RHB, (as described by those above) what they say as far as Marylins are concerned, goes. To me it’s a hideous situation. A SOTA summit today, but not tomorrow.

Of course, if you support the introduction of P100 for G when the time arrives, these wonderful but lost summits will not be re-introduced into the SOTA scheme due to the lack of the required seperation value between twin peaks, but many other summits will be added.




In reply to GW0DSP:

Chris, Sota is governed by a third party, RHB,

Not correct. SOTA in the UK uses lists administered and maintained by the RHB group (who also do surveys etc) and the association managers can choose to update the SOTA lists to follow the RHB lists but giving time for crossover as Andy mentions above.

73 Marc G0AZS


Well I never, who would have thought that after all the years my school teacher would be proven right, it seems I do have a problem with authority.

That rule stinks big time. The quicker that it is changed so that NP-021 and NP-025 can be re-instated the better.

If nobody agrees that the more mountains the better then I will leave quietly with my tail between my legs. Though I have more than a hunch that I have support on this.

Chris 2E0FSR


In reply to 2E0FSR:

I support you Chris as you well know, and its time for people to put their coats on and stand up and be counted. You may be aware that in another thread, the one about Wainwrights, I have put a proposition forward for all SOTA participants to have a get together with the MT and G/AM at the Blackpool Rally to try and sort out what the participants feel is in need of change, as of yet there has been no reply from the MT, we will see what happens.

A copy of my proposal is now available on http://www.sotaforum.co.uk/index.php
for all to see, also we have seen increased traffic in our poll which is still running and is showing a definate sway of gargantuan proportions towards the P100 rule. Can we urge those in favour of HUMPS/P100 rule if you havent done already to go and vote, it is totally anonymous to all except the admin, and you are only allowed one vote per member.

Support is growing and growing for P100 in the G association, it just needs support for the proposal so we can take it to James for approval !



In reply to 2E0FSR:

I fail to see your logic, Chris, if NP-021 and NP-025 are reinstated then you automatically lose NP-031 and NP-032. Net result: no change in the number of summits!


Brian G8ADD


Of course I will sign the petition in support of the P100 rule.
As the saying goes, ‘If you can’t get what you want at Morrisons then go to Tescos’. Relate that to if you can’t get what you want out of sota then people will go elsewhere for kicks, other bands/modes ect.

Brian, Im for re-instating NP-021 and NP-025 without losing NP-031 and NP-032. The more summits the better in my opinion.

Chris 2E0FSR


In reply to 2E0FSR:

This post/thread has annoyed me, but I’m biting my tongue.

I will say however:

I love taking part in SOTA, and can’t understand why people knock the rules and rulemakers. SOTA is a hobby and nobody is forced to take part.

73 Colin


In reply to M0CGH:

Colin, firstly Im not knocking the rules or the rulemakers. Try and see it as a customer requesting how a shopkeeper could improve a product that it supplies to its customers.

Secondly, don’t bite your tongue you will make it bleed.

Chris 2E0FSR


In reply to 2E0FSR:

But now you are running into a difficulty of defining a summit. What do you favour, P100, P50, P25 or abandoning prominence in favour of what?




In reply to M1EYP:

Sota is goverened by a third party, RHB

No Mike, SOTA in England is governed by the G AM, and the programme as
a whole by the MT.

I can’t reply to that point or a ban will be implemented on me.

To me it’s a hideous situation…

What would your chosen definition be for a SOTA summit then Mike?

Simple, anything which meets P100 requirement.



In reply to M1EYP:

The quicker that it is changed…

How many people would call them
"mountains" though I’m not sure!


We are Summits on The Air and not Mountains on The Air.



In reply to 2E0FSR:

There has to be some sort of framework for any scheme that involves awards/certificates. SOTA has chosen to use the Marilyn list published and maintained by the RHB.
There is a wish from some for a change, of course others want the status quo.Both claim to be in the majority.
The extremes seem to be from ‘stay as it is’ to ‘any hill will do’.
I support the change to P100 and no further. Simply because it addresses some issues with regard to economics and inclusivity and as it is allowed elswhere I believe,some will say contentiously,it should be universal. But I support it most because it still uses a recognised list maintained by the RHB.

Roger G4OWG


In reply to M1EYP:

Would that not still result in your "hideous situation"
though Mike? It is RHB (or close associates of RHB) that maintain the
HuMPs (P100) list, and it is subject to the same, review, resurveying
and updating process as the Marilyns list.


Yes it would… but it would be to the benefit of SOTA, increase activity, save money and travelling times for activators, create more uniques closer to home for those who seek them, increase the challenge for the chasers, offer opportunity for potential newcomers to SOTA in the lower lands, could possibly offer opportunity to the less fit and give us a sense of equality by bringing us into line with other associations, hence offering a level playing field. The pros are many, the cons are few.



In reply to M0CGH:
Hi Colin Nice one.Why dont the folk that dont like the rules go off and start their own system. HOTA humps one the air.If ya dont like the food dont eat it.
All the best Geoff.


Tom, a tad pedantic dont you think?

The bottom line is that wherever you get a group of people interested in the same thing, wether that be a fishing club, golf club, or even a make your own soup club there will always be little seperate little groups that form and people will always have disagreements.

Suppose it’s time to put this thread to bed now.

Chris 2EOFSR

PS: I wouldn’t say I’m the best operator on the wireless, but I’m definitely in the top one…