[ARDF] 1:10000 vs. 1:150000

[Marvin Johnston]

While I don't intend to compete, but rather help out with the epunch and
whatever is necessary, I do have some thoughts :).

Mainly, don't let the map scale get in the way of setting good courses!!! And
remember, the objective of the course setter is to set up a fair playing field
for the competitors to compete *against each other*! And the usual orienteering
criteria of multiple route choices, etc. are also important.

Those of us who are a bit older may have some trouble reading the 1:15,000 map
due to decreased eyesight :(, but I would pretty much ignore that *unless* the
map detail is really required for navigation or for the competitor to know where
they are on the map.

And I wouldn't worry at all about map size as long as competitors know what that
size is before the event.

Marvin, KE6HTS



"Kenneth E. Harker" wrote:
> 
>      The organizing committee for the 2008 USA ARDF Championships is having
> an internal debate about the map scale to use for the competition.  We would
> like to have the maps fit on an 8.5" x 11" sheet of paper.
> 
> 1:15000: Same scale as used in World Championships.  We can probably get
>          slightly longer courses on the maps, but that might involve slight
>          overlap in terrain from day 1 to day 2.
> 
> 1:10000: Easier to read, including some terrain detail (principally dry
>          ditch markings) that tend to get lost at 1:150000.  Courses would
>          necessarily be shorter in order to fit entirely on the map - some
>          classes would probably have an optimal course length < 6 km.
> 
>      I would like to get a sense of what everyone would prefer.  In 2006
> in North Carolina we used 1:15000.  In 2007 in California we used 1:10000.
> 
> --
> Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
> kenharker at kenharker.com
> http://www.kenharker.com/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ARDF mailing list
> ARDF at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ardf