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

SOTA Rules - Photo competition!


#1

You’ve got to love it some times.

Courtesy of the recent photo postings on the SOTA Flickr group, how many rule infringements can you spot in this series of photos?


Pete


#2

Operation must not take place in, or in the vicinity of a motor vehicle.
All equipment must be carried to the summit by the activating team via a non-motorised final ascent.
Vehicles cannot be used to power station for SOTA.
Only portable power supplies may be used.

…but the obvious one:

SOTA needs to take place from a valid SOTA summit. I don’t believe this is. In fact, it looks like this is from a country that doesn’t even have a SOTA association!

Tom M1EYP


#3

In reply to G4ISJ:

All we really have here are some photos that are in the wrong group from someone who doesn’t take personal criticism or criticism of his country too well. (Google is your friend.)

I checked the database for the date shown on one photo and there no contacts logged with anyone using that callsign or anything which would match someone in that country.

Andy
MM0FMF


#4

In reply to MM0FMF:
Nice Panda…

(Just saying)

Seriously, I’ve been a Flickr Pro member for nearly 8 years. I now laugh at the pictures I see which are wholly inappropriate to some of the groups I am a member of.

If I was Croatian, operating in a second language that I may not be very skilled in and I found a flickrgroup called “summits on the air” and I’d just been on a summit on the air… well, I think you can work the rest out.

He’s probably never heard of the official summits on the air programme.

Still I haven’t seen a Panda like that for ages, thought they’d all rusted away by now.

73
Gerald
2W0GDA


#5

In reply to 2W0GDA:

Still I haven’t seen a Panda like that for ages, thought they’d all rusted away by now.

You’re expectations match my older view on Fiats. It was back in 1998 I noticed a fair few work colleagues had Fiat Puntos. I was surprised with that considering Fiat’s UK reputation. However, they all seemed to be happy with them. Then good friend Brian G4ZRP said he was buying one and again I was suprised. But when I actually saw it I found a surprisingly well screwed together, reliable, cheap and roomy supermini. I ended up buying one for my XYL a few years later and it too was a remarkably well made car. So much so that when someone decided to install a Ford Focus in the back of her Punto and write off both cars, we had no difficulty in replacing it with another Punto.

What was difficult to accept was just how well built the few I’ve seen are. Before the Focus decided to mate with Sarah’s Punto, it was then 8 years old, 50k miles and there was zero corrosion anywhere to be found. Never garaged and it spent its life in the salty winter Scottish roads. When I think back to how you could watch the Fiats of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s dissolve in front of your eyes when it rained the improvement is very impressive.

So very different from my memory of late 70’s/early 80’s Italian cars, especially my 2x Alfa Romeos. They sold them pre-rotted in those days!

Andy
MM0FMF


#6

In reply to MM0FMF:

They sold them pre-rotted in those days!

Andy
MM0FMF

No Andy that was the ALFA SUD made from recycled washing machines :frowning:

Roger G4OWG


#7

In reply to G4OWG:

In reply to MM0FMF:

They sold them pre-rotted in those days!

Andy
MM0FMF

No Andy that was the ALFA SUD made from recycled washing machines :frowning:

My Austin Cambridge, complete with a bench seat and column change, totally disintergrated, Roger. Broke my heart to drive it to the scrap yard :frowning: Wonderful engine though.

73 Mike
2E0YYY


#8

In reply to G4OWG:

Suds were bad but you got a few years before the tinworm struck. I had a Alfa Romeo GTV Coupe 2.5 V6 on a Y-plate (1983). At 11 months old it had rot in the rear arches and suspension mounts. :frowning:

Long time ago now but I recall the Alfa Sud Sprint Veloce 1500 (looked a bit like the big Alfa Coupe) was a much better drive than my V6. Oh the V6 left it in the dust for brute power and torque but it was a big lumbering car unlike the Sprint Veloce. In fact my 2000 I4 GTV I had before I installed a lamp post in the bonnet was a better drive than the V6. Still the exhaust howl on the V6 at 4500rpm was glorious.

Andy
MM0FMF


#9

In reply to MM0FMF:

I’ve had a few Italian cars :

3 x Alfa 33’s. I had a P4 one of these (4 wheel drive) and this was outrageous fun. The damn thing was lighter than a feather too. Unfortunately, as the successor to the AlfaSud, Alfa still seemed unable to get a grip on rot (what we called the ‘metal maggot’). Such a shame as it had a lot going for it (and is probably much better than you think - a real drivers car).

146Ti 2001 - Great car, massively underrated. Utterly frightening when you press the gas fully down.

GTV 916 2 litre twin-spark 2000. Doesn’t have the power performance to match the looks, great at cornering though with the right tyres. Well made. Body is mostly plastic (so THAT’S how Alfa stopped the rot!)

I’m now driving a Fiat Bravo Sport 165. I think these are well made and underrated. I’ll take it over a Focus any day. I think it’s also quite cute but it can be brutal with the throttle open.

Anyway… where was I? Oh yeah…

In reply to M1EYP:

Operation must not take place in, or in the vicinity of a motor
vehicle.
All equipment must be carried to the summit by the activating team via
a non-motorised final ascent.
Vehicles cannot be used to power station for SOTA.
Only portable power supplies may be used.

…but the obvious one:

SOTA needs to take place from a valid SOTA summit. I don’t believe
this is. In fact, it looks like this is from a country that doesn’t
even have a SOTA association!

Tom M1EYP

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but what’s “in the vicinity” of a motor vehicle. And what about a non-motorised final ascent? How short can that be?

Thought I might bump into you Tom on Monday up Foel Fanelli or Moel Famau… were you hiding from me (again ;)))))

R


#10

In reply to G7LAS:

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but what’s “in the vicinity” of a motor vehicle.

It is deliberately left vague. Use your own common-sense and judgement and consider if you are operating within the spirit of the programme or not.

Andy
MM0FMF


#11

In reply to MM0FMF:

Thanks Andy… I like that approach.


#12

In reply to G7LAS:

Thought I might bump into you Tom on Monday up Foel Fanelli or Moel Famau… were you hiding from me (again ;)))))

No.

MW1EYP/P on GW/NW-051: QSOs 0842 to 0856.
MW1EYP/P on GW/NW-044: QSOs 1048 to 1120.
GW7LAS/P on GW/NW-044: QSOs 1305 to 1314.
GW7LAS/P on GW/NW-051: QSOs 1450 to 1455.

So it doesn’t look like our paths would have crossed, although we may well have passed each other (in opposite directions) on the road between Bwlch Penbarrass and Loggerheads.

Tom M1EYP