Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Contesting\s+using\s+remote\s+stations\s*$/: 47 ]

Total 47 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:47:20 -0400
I would say that there's a big difference -- in intent -- between: -- An amateur who chooses the location for a remote station based on the specifics of that location (to take advantage of a farm for
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00338.html (17,790 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:27:14 -0700
To me, the intent is completely irrelevant. As long as the RF part of the station is entirely contained within the 500 meter (or whatever) circle, why do we care if the headphone/mic/paddle lines are
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00363.html (11,089 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "David Robbins K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:00:39 +0000
Due to the technical challenges of setting up and operating a completely remote station they should be given their own operating class and awarded bonus points or granted special multiplier status to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00372.html (12,798 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: Richard Detweiler <rdetweil@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:08:32 -0500
Dave, K1TTT said "should be given their own operating class and awarded bonus points or granted special multiplier status to encourage development of the technology!" I like the way this guy thinks!
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00373.html (9,780 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:30:32 -0500
Yes, and even more points when they work one another, and double mults when all RF is eliminated - it only pollutes the ionosphere. I'd recommend Skype - it's a great mode, with highly advanced techn
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00375.html (10,257 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Eric Hilding" <b38@hilding.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:12:55 -0800
If remote stations are banned, I'm also out of here - I'd sell $25K worth of stuff collected so far for a remote site operation vs. losing $400K+ in value drop if I had to sell my house in a depresse
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00386.html (6,987 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "David Robbins K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 10:04:29 +0000
Personally I think this discussion was provoked by a poorly written rule. I 'think' the intent of that rule was to ban the use of remote stations 'in addition' to a local operating position. But that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00388.html (9,180 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 10:55:11 -0500 (CDT)
Again, technology gets ahead of the current rules. I'm all for using ONE remote station as your only station in a contest. The rules just need to be updated to clarify such things as how many station
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00395.html (8,400 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:01:38 -0400
Exactly what are the "unfair" advantages of a remote station? It seems to me that there might be some significant *disadvantages* to remote contest operation. -73 de Mike N3LI - _____________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00401.html (8,297 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Jiri Culak" <Jiri.Culak@lwss.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:08:13 -0500
You need to build aerials anyway, build site, do all the hard job regardless of remote or local station. Remote station will be probably less competitive unless you write your own software... Imagine
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00409.html (10,297 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:58:27 -0400
The "unfair" advantages are: 1) the ability to build antennas that that would not be available in normal residential areas, 2) the ability to operate from geographically advantaged locations (e.g.,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00410.html (10,736 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:56:43 -0400
Quote from CQWW rules: Transmitters and receivers must be located within a 500 meter diameter circle or within the property limits of the station licensees address, whichever is greater. All antennas
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00411.html (9,880 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Colleen Brakob" <cbrakob@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:30:04 -0600
Joe, I respectfully agree that those ARE advantages. I respectfully do NOT agree that those advantages are "unfair". 73, de Hans, K0HB/W7 "Just a boy and his radios" ________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00412.html (8,575 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Dennis McAlpine" <dbmcalpine@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:44:06 -0400
If one reads the definition from the CQ WW rules that you so kindly provided, I see nothing that disqualifies a remotely operated station. Just because one has a control wire that is outside the 500
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00413.html (13,368 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:44:55 -0700
So, you're grievance is not so much with remote stations as with QTH envy? I guess you are against guest operators at bigger/better located stations than their own, too? -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R ken
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00414.html (9,136 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:01:26 -0500
I have always felt like using a remote station was somewhere just outside what I considered fair. I have had the experience of owning a home that was not conducive to having a good antenna or running
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00416.html (14,027 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: Jim Rhodes <k0xu@longlines.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:41:23 -0500
It certainly does not. It makes no statement about remote stations, other than to imply that they are allowed. It does not say that the operator has to be within the 500 ft circle, just the transmitt
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00417.html (10,212 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:15:07 -0500
Why is the ability to build bigger and better antennas when you can live at or travel to the site a fair advantage and the ability to build the same antennas when you can only travel there virtually
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00418.html (10,160 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:37:56 -0400
No, I don't have "QTH envy" nor do I have anything against guest operators who actually travel to the station they are operating. I do oppose stations in a location where the operator is not present
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00419.html (11,599 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (score: 1)
Author: "W4ZW" <w4zw@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:38:42 -0400
IMHO there are NO advantages, in fact, there are many disadvantages. Here in Florida, just about every residential community has become a CC&R "restricted" community. Florida is still a primary desti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00420.html (11,710 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu