Theoretically a well equipped QRO mobile could win a 10M contest just by
having dead band access to almost every state for multipliers and likely
good access to the Carribean, etc.
Granted its a stretch and not about 160M but contesters have always been
creative. A prime example is the earliest stations to use 2 radios for
single op since there were no rules against it. That goes back to at least
the 60's. Now it has its own class.
Carl
KM1H
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
To: "ZR" <zr@jeremy.mv.com>
Cc: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>; "Robert McGwier"
<rwmcgwier@gmail.com>; "Tree" <tree@kkn.net>; <topband@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2011 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Nope. The rule says *all* transmitters, receivers, and antennas must be in
the *same* 500m circle. I guess the circle moves around with mobile
stations, but I don't think anyone is worried about those guys.
73, Dick WC1M
On Feb 11, 2011, at 6:55 PM, "ZR" <zr@jeremy.mv.com> wrote:
> So does that mean the guy in his Brooklyn hi rise without any gear can
> operate X number of stations in the US in say the 160M contest and likely
> win? There is no rule I see about not moving the 500m entity X times just
> as
> their is no rule about a cross country trucker operating and submitting a
> log..
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
> To: "'Robert McGwier'" <rwmcgwier@gmail.com>; "Tree" <tree@kkn.net>
> Cc: <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 3:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
>
>
>> Your SDR was effectively a "remote receiver" used by the DX station.
>> Credit
>> for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules
>> governing
>> specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC
>> credit:
>>
>> 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location
>> of
>> any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the
>> purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within
>> the
>> same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver.
>>
>> As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the
>> sentence, "remote operating points" is not defined. Does that include
>> only
>> the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the
>> transmitter
>> and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In
>> fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the
>> second
>> sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be
>> located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly.
>>
>> Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for
>> most
>> CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for
>> the
>> Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver
>> rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers
>> and
>> antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the
>> DX
>> station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver
>> (your
>> SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would
>> not
>> be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and
>> categories.
>>
>> However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the
>> operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a
>> station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the
>> transmitter
>> and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where
>> the
>> station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a
>> transmitter
>> and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are
>> sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the
>> station
>> over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and
>> counts as having been made from Ghana.
>>
>> Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little.
>>
>> 73, Dick WC1M
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgwier@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM
>> To: Tree
>> Cc: topband@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
>>
>> As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined
>> Radio
>> and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient,
>> contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the
>> technology. Boo Hiss indeed.
>>
>> Bob
>> N4HY
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree <tree@kkn.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote:
>>>
>>>> What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me
>>>
>>> What country are the people really "working" with their radio?
>>>
>>> There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a
>>> single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making
>>> these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for
>>> DXCC.
>>>
>>> Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!!
>>>
>>> Boo hiss!!
>>>
>>> Tree N6TR
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|