[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Control in Contests

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Control in Contests
From: Richard Thorne <rmthorne@att.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 20:10:06 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

The problem here is Paul's myopic view of remote operation via the 
internet.  He's not arguing to change contest rules to accommodate or 
not to accommodate remote operations via the internet, he is simply 
stating that remote operation over the internet should be abolished, 
correct Paul?

I would suggest when Paul makes these type posts, ignore it, let it dye 
and we can move on.

Now if some one wants to argue the fine points of contest rules and dxcc 
rules as it relates to remote operation via the internet lets proceed.

For example, I could not put up antennas at my old qth, so I went the 
remote route.  For ten years I had a lot of fun building, changing, 
modifying and improving my station.  I would never have considered using 
different remote stations around the lower 48 to work on my dxcc totals, 
it would be from the single station that I built.   Using other 
stations, while ok per dxcc rules, would not be within the spirit and 
intent of the rule.

Just my 2 cents, it just bothers me when Paul, who is in the minority, 
is basically saying if the only way you can get on the air is via remote 
using the internet, please don't.


Rich - N5ZC

On 4/11/2012 4:22 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> In the ARRL Contest Update for April 11, 2012 we read
>      Radio Arcala team member Toni OH2UA was at the
>      controls of CQ8X for a serious contest operation
>      in the Azores for WPX SSB.  That's not unusual.
>      What was unusual is that the 4543 contacts were
>      made over a remote link across the Internet -
>      4500 kilometers from the actual station!  Remote
>      operation is becoming more and more common.  Big
>      scores like CQ8X's 15 million points show that
>      remoting can work well!"
> It's not surprising that remote control works well - it uses
> the internet!  Nevertheless, it seems to me that if the only
> way you can have a "QSO" is to first connect to the internet,
> and stay connected, then, however you choose to describe it,
> the contact is at best some form of hybrid communications
> contact.  Technical and personal considerations, no matter
> how impressive, how challenging or how deserving, cannot
> change this fact.
> By connecting to the internet, contesters abandon the
> communications independence that defines amateur radio -
> the independence that justifies our access to the bands.
> Remote control may be great fun, a significant technical
> challenge and a source of personal satisfaction, but none
> of this is relevant - and especially so in the context of
> contesting.
> Those who claim "it's the only way I can get on the air"
> deserve no sympathy. Those who do it to gain a competitive
> advantage deserve derision.  Remote control serves only
> to undermine amateur radio by putting the wires back into
> wireless.  It doesn't just devalue your contacts, it
> disqualifies them as amateur-radio QSOs.  If you can't
> operate amateur radio, or be competitive, from where you
> are, then go to where you can.
> To those who enjoy being hybrid-communications amateurs,
> I say go ahead and have fun with remote control, but
> please not during contests - and don't misrepresent your
> contacts as amateur-radio QSOs.  The way to promote
> amateur radio, and contesting in particular, is to
> demonstrate and celebrate its absolute independence as
> a communications mode.
> In tolerating remote control, contest organisers lose
> control.
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>