Review of SOTA Qualifying Sunmmits on the F/NO Reg

Shortly several summits in the F/NO region will be deactivated because of prominence issues. We have made a number of attempts to contact the Association Manager and the NO Region Manager to discuss these without success. Therefore it becomes necessary to de-activate several summits that are not P150 compliant.

Full details of these prominence issues are posted elsewhere at
However for those that don’t want to get into the fine details, in order to provide a perspective of the kind of issues encountered, we find that NO-009 385m and NO-010 385m are both encompassed within the same 375m contour thus indicating a maximum of 10m prominence. As another example, we find that walking north from NO-007 398m, the ground drops briefly to about 384m and then rises to 405m followed by a short drop to 391m from where it rises steadily to 448m. It isn’t logical that you can walk up hill from a summit.

We cannot be sure how this situation has arisen, but it needs to be corrected. The summits that appear to be not P150 are NO-002, NO-005, NO-007, NO-010, NO-011, NO-012, NO-013, NO-014, NO-015, NO-019, NO-020, NO-027, NO-029, NO-034, NO-039, NO-044, and NO-045. Also the summits NO-004, NO-036 and NO-038 do not qualify in their current locations but will qualify if revised to appropriate locations.
73 Jim g0cqk
Summits Manager

In reply to G0CQK:

Thanks for your work on this. It makes sense to have a recognised standard for these things. It may well be that the meaning of prominence was not properly understood initially by whoever put the F/NO ARM section together; all the more so as the references to it were (are?) all in English. It is a bit tricky to get your head round at first!

As the person responsible for “discovering” prominence in the context of SOTA after lengthy (fruitless) discussions about what a hill is, I still feel sure that it is the best general approach to classification.



In reply to G0CQK:
Hello, Bye the same way, you should delete this entry :
F/AM-579 Mont Gros (witch does not exist) this place
is the same as F/AM-743 Mont Agel whitch is the top of a hill
occupied by military and civil aviation, just 1000m up the mediterranee sea.
The Mont Gros near Mont Agel is at 688m asl and do not qualify because not P150.
73’s from Gerald F6HBI

In reply to F6HBI:
Thanks for this information Gerald. What you report is very clear on the map that I have. Since my first posting, I now have 3 more non qualifying to add to the de-activation list. If anyone knows of any more please let me know.
73 Jim g0cqk

In reply to G0CQK:
Hello Jim, i know some other in my aerea (dept 06):

F/AM-653 Montagnac (this should be deleted)for no P150 between that one and F/AM-652 Cime du Castel

F/AM-745 Tete de Chien (this should be deleted) no P150 between that one and
F/AM-744 Mont de la Bataille

F/AM-655 and F/AM-656 (only 56m between this 2 summits)the good one is the south one at 625m F/AM-655

If you need map you can use 1/25000 map on line here:

73’s Gerald

In reply to F6HBI:

many thanks for that excellent website link. I visit France quite often and will find it very useful. The maps are superb and the satellite images quite recent too!

Also many thanks for all the SOTA QSOs on CW.


Mike G4DDL

In reply to F6HBI:
Thanks once more Gerald. I will take these into account. The map resource to which you provide a link, is extremely valuable. It makes our UK OS resource look primitive in comparison.
73 Jim g0cqk

In reply to G0CQK:
Hi Jim !
we had an earthquarke two days ago here in F/AM region, 4,9 on the richter square ! I propose you to check all summits now ! good luck !

you analyse in north of France is right, but if you erase all of theses summits, it will stay a desert ! Anyway, if you check who activate those summit, you will see that are mostly part are english. Pity for them… it was on the way of holidays…

it could be more pedagogical to propose a intermediate rules that permits people living in that region to access in sota program !
just delet summits is too easy ! try to consider the activity that could created or maintained.
sorry for my bad english.


In reply to F5HTR:
No problem with your English. Actually we anticipate being able to add some summits that had not been identified before but we await confirmation.
73 Jim G0CQK

The F/NO summits that did not meet the prominence criterion have been deactivated from end February. At the same time a small number of summits reported by activators elsewhere were also de-activated. Our review of the F-NO region continues and subject to confirmation some summits recently identified by independent prominence experts will be added.
73 Jim G0CQK

In reply to G0CQK:

Although it was inevitable that the non-conforming summits would be deleted, I was hoping that there would have been a period of “last orders please”, so that we would get a chance to make a final activation. I had planned to visit F/NO-027 next week, but it seems that I will have to re-think.

I was the first activator, way back on 01/04/2007, and, fortuitously, I will have been the last with my 2011 visit. Still, it would have been nice to get the point for 2012 too …

73 de Les