I strongly disagree with W2GD on one thing though. DX Contesting is an East Coast Old Boys' Club, and while it makes them happy and boosts their egos, it is NOT good for contesting in general. There
In the beginning, "self-spotting" (on the cluster) was legal.That was when the backbone was on UHF.Using the internet to solicit contacts in a contest is not allowed. The "unsportsmanlike" use of a r
This has gotten off track. The subject is not about your typical remote transceiver operation. It is about allowing people to use remote receive locations with the transmitter located some other plac
Shouldn't this topic be dealt with at a generic level rather than CQ WW 160? The remote receiver is as valuable on 80 or 40 as it is on 160 in a contest. I agree wholeheartedly with the feeling that
Jim, I agree with you that contesting is an ego booster. Operating proficiency takes a back seat to using excessive power and any aid, ethical or otherwise, to get the highest score or snag that elus
There are two basic issues I see here: 1. Should remote receivers be allowed. 2. There will be cheaters. Let's try to make sure we are talking only one of them. We can argue if remote receivers shoul
We actually have three camps the two you describe below and the camp that will use all those things and then claim a class they are not really in. We all know that lots and lots of people use packet
I am standing tall with W2GD that all contest qso's need to be located at the same location as the xmtr. No Remote rx allowed. 73 Chet Moore N4FX Greetings Fellow Topband Contesters: During the last
There are many possible ways. N6TR has given us one excellent example with the Stew Perry contest. The major problem with the existing rules is the use of multipliers and what constitutes a multiplie
Tree et al, So far I have stayed in the background reading all those US based comments. like to add the following: 1 I do agree that a Remote RX site, just like ZL3IX, VO1HP and many more are using i
Hear Hear! Stew Perry is a fantastic concept for contesting fairness. Fairness is what makes the fun! & I'm almost as far east as you can get in the USA... Gary KA1J -- This email has been checked f
Author: Herbert Schoenbohm <herbert.schoenbohm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:16:52 -0400
Great post Jim....but it should be pointed out that the ABC islands of Aruba, Bonair and Curacao are much further West being at about 70 degrees WL compared to my QTH at 64.7 degrees in the *Eastern*
I've seen two ideas floated to solve the multiplier issue. One is to make all members of the European Union a single multiplier. That would certainly give the east coast a taste of what it's like con
CQWW used to have the Xtreme category that allowed/encouraged remote internet stations. Seems like that's the place for those who want to use remote receivers. I haven't kept up with that category bu
Guys, please keep up this discussion. I am reading all the comments, and it helps to hear what people are thinking. I won't make any personal comments until after I digest it all. I will tell one lit
Andy, You were not confused with that thought. It was crystal clear thinking regarding what constitutes a valid two way QSO between two station locations without other communication methods involved.
We are are going to allow remote receivers, why not remote transmitters all over the world too...It if were legal. We might as well just get on any one of the messaging systems, Facebook, Apple, Hang
Absolutely fascinating that you would hold this view for contesting but not for DXCC based on your historical comments, Mike. Larry K5RK We are are going to allow remote receivers, why not remote tra
ARRL changed the rules to allow remotes within the country. I didn't. I don't even use remotes. The ARRL also allowed you to move around. These are completely different animals. Since you can move ar
I've been reading the mail on this and naturally have an opinion. The internet is not radio! ANY use of the internet during contests should be prohibited. Before, fine. After, fine. During? It ain't