In reply to DL4MFM:
mario great description, thank you
DG0JMB
Joerg
In reply to DL4MFM:
Hi Mario
One minor correction, minimum elevation of a SOTA summit under P100 conditions is 100m.
73 Merry Xmas es HNY Marc G0AZS
In reply to DL4MFM:
Thanks for posting that, Mario. I presume that activators on the GMA summits will call “CQ GMA” and on dual SOTA and GMA summits will call something like “CQ SOTA and GMA”?
The only point that I’m not clear on is how you define your summits. Are they named points on the map or are you just using the old SOTA summits? Will you be including any new SOTA summits that might be identified?
73
Brian G8ADD
In reply to G8ADD:
I was wondering how the GMA summits are defined too.
At first glance there would appear to be several other points along the range of mountains (hills?) shown on that site which could be defined as summits (unless some formal criteria are defined).
Stewart
G0LGS
In reply to DL4MFM:
Hi friends,
Vy sorry to know this new project.
Looking to GMA rules, it seems to me that its rather close to portable operations than summits operations. Why not ? It will be a new activity for DL friends.
Mario, will there be also an Internet data base like Gary’s SOTA DB ?
Merry Christmas and HNY to all
Alain F6ENO
In reply to G8ADD:
Will you be including any new SOTA summits that might be identified?
Brian,
how could we be made aware of the new summits that we seem to overlook? In our own P100 we did not find many - and nothing worthwile visitng.
Regards,
Gerd.
In reply to DF9TS:
Hi Gerd,
we (DF6PW Hardy and myself) did the work for DM/RP,SR and two weeks ago for DM/NW. First of all we did only delete the non-valid hills in the published list but detected that there must be quiet a lot of new ones.
So we looked around to find a software to do a systematic approach.
A short google search and we found the WINPROM software (programmed by Edward Earl). Edward Earl is one of the founder of the “Prominence Yahoo Group”.
He did provide us with the SRTM data for his program and we could generate a raw list for our P100 task. Now we had an instrument to search for new ones. And we found a lot of new ones in RP and NW.
It was still a lot of manual and tedious work with the TOP50 maps to verify the prominence.
73
Walter
In reply to DK1BN:
Hi Walter
Great work… Good you have found Winprom although I find it a little unfriendly in places. Also you need to ask Edward for the “divide trees” each time you look at an area.
I suggest you also have a look at the software I also use as it is a little more user friendly and can do more tasks in any area you wish with a variety of DEM data that you choose, some of which is a higher resolution than 3 arc sec SRTM data.
Please email me direct if you want more details.
73 Marc G0AZS
In reply to DL4MFM:
Hi Mario
I suggest you discuss that with the AM as all we have done so far is check the supplied ARM’s for 1/1/09.
As we all agreed above, it is the task of the AM and RM to propose new ones in an ARM.
However, as I indicated, I believe there is the potential for a good number of new summits that could included at later stage (provided they are indeed P100) and the AM wishes to do so.
Best 73 Marc G0AZS
In reply to DL4MFM:
Hi Mario
I’m not sure what you mean as I tried to be as open as possible.
It was, is and will always be the AM’s responsibility to propose new summit lists. The MT ratifies them and adds them to the database if they are valid. Are you suggesting a different process?
73 Marc G0AZS
In reply to DL4MFM:
GMA on 7.032 now (QRP freq) !
Many station replying, F, GB, DL… all involved in GMA program I suppose.
Sri, I can follow you in this kind of behaviour.
F6ENO
In reply to F6ENO:
Hi Alain, this summit is still ok for SOTA according to the SOTA database, I think?
73
Mike GW0DSP
In reply to GW0DSP:
They are calling CQ GMA SX-055 so, for me it’s a GMA activity.
Thanks for confusion !
73 Mike
Alain
In reply to DL4MFM:
We were on some DM/RP hills where I could only see on our GPS that we were on top of a hill. If we now travel around and have a look on a hill you can really see that it is at least a P100 :-). In our area (Westerwald region) we lost quite a lot of refs. But now there is a distinct criteria which was only partially used at the beginning of SOTA in the DM region. However lets have a new start with a lot of new ones ( DM/NW 22 old(2009)… may be 78 new ones). GMA? … have a look on SOTA Italy.
73
Walter
DK1BN
In reply to DL4MFM:
Perhaps if GMA had a published set of rules and summits it might be easier for everybody to understand.
For example, does GMA have rules relating to the setting up of a summit station? Are GMA “activators” allowed to drive onto their hills and activate from the car? Such information would be useful so that SOTA chasers would know if a GMA station, on a summit in both lists, would be valid for SOTA points.
However, as you say, “No clear answers from nobody (sic)”
73 de Les
In reply to DK1BN:
As long as the GMA activators also call for SOTA on the SOTA valid summits and on such summits operate in accordance with SOTA rules, the two schemes are not incompatible and IMHO should not be regarded as in competition. GMA adds to the activity and gives us something to work whilst waiting for the SOTA activations to reach the summits! I wish them well.
73
Brian G8ADD
In reply to G8ADD:
In reply to DK1BN:
As long as the GMA activators also call for SOTA on the SOTA valid
summits, the two schemes are not incompatible .
Hi Brian,
Must we understand that when an activator is calling GMA/XX000 on a summit with a SOTA Ref, chasers can get SOTA points ?
And when an activator makes a GMA activy, what can MT do if he uploads his QSOs in Data base ?
Open door to lots of confusions.
73 Alain
Hi alain,
I suppose when a summit is no longer valid for SOTA it will no longer be possible to claim that summit in the database?
Joyeux Noel, Alain
Peter
In reply to ON3WAB:
According to the rules new mountains will be like TH-0001 instead of SOTA TH-001 IMHO
Merry Xmas
Walter
In reply to ON3WAB:
I suppose when a summit is no longer valid for SOTA it will no longer
be possible to claim that summit in the database?
Of course Peter, but when it is a valid summit ?
And as said Les, we don’t know if GMA uses the same rules as SOTA, such as reaching the summit by human power, avoiding permanently installed power or fossil-fuel genreators, etc… etc…
My opinion is that we must not mix SOTA and GMA activity.
MT will have the last word.
Joyeux Noël également Peter !
73 Alain