Author: jpescatore--- via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 06:15:00 -0400
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 multiopera
My understanding is that it becomes multi op ONLY If someone assumes control operator duties under the FCC definition, which is: (13) *Control operator.* An amateur operator designated by the license
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
John, I think the key word is acts. If the remote operator completely controls the station then the on-site presence of another (non-participating) licensee at the station isnt germane. However, if t
Sent from my iPhone Not necessarily. If the remote operation doesn't require a control op at the remote site, it's still single op. Not every situation requires an op at the remote site. Presumably,
Author: jpescatore--- via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:03:01 -0400
Hans, looks like reading the part .105 definition of control operator, If I operate W4AAW remotely and Mike W4AAW designates me as control op, I'm then both the station operator and the control op, s
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.
I think most of you are missing the point in this, in that the rule regarding control operators turning the entry into a multi-op is aimed at foreign ops who operate US stations remotely. If you are
Kindasorta reminds me of the news media, following a news conference! Telling me exactly what I heard, except in this case telling me exactly what I read. 73, Shelby -- 73, Shelby - K4WW As I don't h
I strongly disagree with this provision of the new rules, the essence of which is to discourage remote contest operation of US stations by those without a US license. The local "control operator" con
Bart, With your quoted definition, there have been a lot of miscategorized operations over the years. I've even read in 3830 write-ups about station hosts swapping out amps, climbing the tower, etc.
The easy solution is that any foreign op who wants to operate a US station can take the VE exams and get a US license, as many have done. There are even VE sessions overseas. 73 Ria, N2RJ ___________
Remote stations should never be used in a contest. The length of the mic/key wire matters. Be on-site or be gone. Charly -- Charly, HS0ZCW _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest m
Author: jpescatore--- via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 05:24:48 -0400
I received some clarification on the spirit and intent of the rule change around remote operation: If the station owner designates the remote operator as control op and the station owner does not per
Bart, All of the other major contests allow a station host to maintain the performance of the station before, during, and after the contest. Below are the single op rule definitions for the major con
And the logic behind this statement is ????? 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinf
These rules define contesting purely as appliance operation, nothing having to do with building, setting up, maintaining, or fixing the station. Under this principle, there is no good reason to prohi
The issue on repairs mid contest is about operating time. If you have standby equipment available but still have to do the swap or repair yourself, you are not operating while you do it. If a pit cre
I know it's not always true, but I just assume the guest ops are getting some support from their hosts, so I just ignore their scores when comparing to my own. (Not that I'm ever in contention for a
Why not also ignore those, who buy antennas instead of building them, and those, who buy radios instead of assembling them from parts? :-) Yuri I know it's not always true, but I just assume the gues