----- Original Message -----
From: "Zack Widup" <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
> ... Somehow it just doesn't seem right to me. I could
> set up a remote receiving site for 160 meters in Europe
> ... I don't see the fun in that. No way it could be
> acceptable for DXCC.
I'm with Zack on this. If it doesn't seem right, you
can bet it's not right.
As for DXCC validity, let's take an example. EI0DX,
just down the road, lets Zack control his receiver.
That way, Zack "works" me on 160m. To make the QSO,
his RF has travelled 3000 miles, mine has travelled
3 miles. It doesn't seem right to me. Let's hear
from anyone who claims that's a valid two-way 160m
DXCC QSO for either of us.
It gets worse. I have no way of knowing Zack is
using a remote receiver, unless he tells me. As
it's a contest, I'm not interested in anything but
the exchange. I think I've actually worked a W9
on 160m!
I suggest the time has come for a reality check on
remote RXs, remote TXs, and remote-control generally.
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|