What's new with this? We have had many rules for years and years that
have no way of being enforced other than reliance on the integrity of
the entrant.
W0MU
On 7/28/2017 11:39 AM, Barry wrote:
The problem is there's no way to enforce any of this, short of having
streaming video of the entire station.
Barry W2UP
On 7/28/2017 09:51, Ria Jairam wrote:
How far do you go? Is it okay for the station owner to do things like
adjust the antenna switching while the operator continues to make
QSOs? How about turning the antenna(s) or dealing with computer
glitches?
In a true single op, this wouldn't happen. You would stop and fix the
problem yourself. IMO, having a "pit crew" to do this presents an
unfair advantage.
Ria, N2RJ
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
wrote:
I don't think the station owner swapping out an amp for a guest op
should
change the category. Nothing was done to find or identify a qso for the
guest op. And, how many station owners are going to let a guest op
change
out their amps?
Chuck W5PR
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 7:34 AM Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>
wrote:
Remote stations should never be used in a contest. The length of the
mic/key wire matters. Be on-site or be gone. Charly
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
wrote:
Hi Barry
I contend this rule change does not affect guest operating: in either
case, a local guest op or a remote guest op, the mere presence of the
owner
does not constitute a class change to multi.
Whether you're in person or via internet, it is my contention
that, aside
from the exception I will get to, if the host does not intervene,
he is
not
an operator. Many remote operations happen with no intervention of a
local
operator.
If you're remote or local and the host has to fix something, arguably
you're now multiop.
The exception for remote is when a remote operation requires a local
control op, such as when a foreigner who does not also have a US
licence
is
remotely operating a US station. In that case, the control
operator is an
op and the operation is now multiop.
You'll note US law allows US-licensed operators to be control ops
of US
stations, even remotely.
A twist here is what this means for Gerry, W1VE, operating
remotely via
VY1AAA. I don't believe this rule change affects him, as I believe
his
operation was legal under Canadian law.
73, kelly, ve4xt
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 27, 2017, at 06:36, Barry <w2up@comcast.net> wrote:
John makes a very good point.
Every guest op has a host taking care of station issues, making
meals,
etc. It makes no difference whether a guest op is on site with a
3 ft
long
connection to the radio, or has a key or mic connection via the
internet.
This rule is a step in the wrong direction and should be
reconsidered.
Barry W2UP
On 7/27/2017 04:15, jpescatore--- via CQ-Contest wrote:
Bart - the wording of the rule change for remote operations ("If
another operator acts as the on-site control operator of the remote
station
you are using, the entry must be submitted in a multioperator
category")
implies that there is no such thing as a single-op remote entry.
How does the control-op issue compare to a physical guest op, where
the
station owner is still physically present during the contest?
Should such
guest operations be considered multi-op as well? If the issue is
that the
local control op *might* be required to take some action, the same is
true
of the station owner with a physically present guest op.
73 John K3TN
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
--
Charly, HS0ZCW
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|