(RE-Threaded from Packet debate) In a discussion with a fellow NCCC member after our Annual Awards meeting last night, a mini-debate about "remote site" operations and "rules" necessitates a question
The purpose of these rules is to assure that the operation takes place from one geographic location. If one were to use multiple locations, it would create an unfair advantage. Imagine operating 75m
As I could easily imagine a high performance 160M beverage antenna sticking out of the 500 meter circle on each end, I could easily find fault with that proposed rule. Two beverages, running in diffe
I'm a remote contester out of necessity. As far as I'm concerned I am following the current rule both in black and white and in the spirit of the rule. My transmitters and receivers and antennas are
Author: Dennis McAlpine <dbmcalpine@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:40:57 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
The question of remote contesting or, to go a step further, distributed contesting,is becoming much more of a possibility as new equipment is being offered with that capability, e.g. the TS480, the O
I live in downtown EU capital Ljubljana (pop. 250K) with high man-made noise. I was thinking long ago of 20 miles remote club station S50L at mountain top within quiet national park. Wireless VHF lin
As a VE3, I'd love to have a remote contest station on Sable Island (180 mi off the Nove Scotia coast) and another on the west coast of Vancouver Island (British Columbia) and operate from home. Oper
The "rules" (at least the general rules for ARRL contests) already say something to that effect: 3.7. All transmitters and receivers must be located within a 500-meter diameter circle, excluding ante
Hot Diggity-Dog... TNX. Gee, I sure wish the entire, complete rules for a specific contest could be contained *within* those contest rules themselves. {SIGH} Umh, that was meant to be (partially) ton
Seems like whenever someone tries to push the envelope higher, people try and try to find ways to shoot their progress down. With new technologies, things are going to get very interesting in the nex
Interesting discussion about remote stations. I fully agree with the idea that as long as only the operator is moved out of the equation and all TX and RX stuff is done in the same place that there i
I have not kept up with the entire thread but I would hope that a competitor would only be allowed to use one remote station. Maybe this would be deserving of it's own classification. I would not car
With urban dwellers facing the onslaught of more and more zoning restrictions and the time pressures facing working folks (at least here in the states), it would seem to me that the rules SHOULD enco
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- True, but there is a reason why people generally resist having the envelope pushed, and that is the resisters generally want to maintain competitiveness. In near
California remoted to an east coast station. Hopefully that same station would not be using any equipment that he might have in Cali at the same time. Difficult to police. < More importantly, if that
[...] Now, the serious M/M's (and SO2R folks) have a much easier way to eliminate intra-station interference - just create a receiving site 50 miles away and you can hear a LOT better on the same and
Author: Claude Du Berger <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:01:36 -0500
I was monitorinig 80m SSB last night and guys were talking about Remote Site Contesting Rules. One was having the idea that a remote operator should be able to monitor his signal on all bands... Some
I see absolutely no reason why Mike's idea can't work. I also see absolutely no reason why a ham running a KP4 station must be physically located in KP4 -- so long as he's not running the KP4 station
That's an extremely good point, Mark, which I hadn't really considered. Your spot on that it would allow you to CQ and listen on the same band with zero "self QRM". If you imposed the rule that you h
I checked with the ARRL Contest Manger last year about operating remotely in the ARRL DX Contest from KP2 via remote while still here in California. "No problem". Well, "THEE Problem" is that nasty t