There is no RF in the signal path between the operator and the station
equipment for most of the stations I know of. Most speakers/headphones are
connected from the radio to the operator by wires. Most microphones are
connected by wires. Audio transfer takes place by longitudinal compression
waves in the atmosphere (also not RF). I gave an example in another posting
of actual RF in this signal path using a couple of CB walkie-talkies. But
that was a single case. I don't personally know of anyone else who has done
So you either use a wire that's a couple feet long to connect you to your
station, or you use wires/Internet that is hundreds or thousands of miles
long. Actually, there is more probability that there is RF in part of this
path using Internet than there is at your home station.
73, Zack W9SZ
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Roger Parsons <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 at 17:42 Paul O'Kane wrote:
> > What's different about remote control is that it uses
> > the internet (typically) to replace RF in the signal path
> > between the operators concerned. That's what makes the
> > QSO fundamentally different from vanilla QSOs, using RF
> > only. We're back to the difference between hybrid QSOs
> > and amateur-radio QSOs - and that's why remote control
> > entries should be classified separately.
> But Paul, you have on a previous occasion said that the contacts
> I make from my remote station are not 'amateur-radio QSOs'.
> I connect to my remote station using an amateur radio (900MHz) link.
> No third party carrier is involved at any point.
> I feel strongly that by any reasonable definition this is amateur radio .
> 73 Roger
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list