On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:02:10PM -0500, Bill Parry wrote:
> It seems to me that we are talking about two very similar issues. Packet
> involves the use of stations in other locations letting us know about
> stations that we might want to work. Having remote receiving station gives
> us access to that same information. Packet has the advantage of locating the
> station for us; remote receiving stations have the advantage of locating and
> hearing these stations (that we otherwise might not be able to hear) for
> ourselves.
It is rather interesting to compare the two cases:
1. Remote receiver where the audio comes back to the operator and he listens
to it.
2. Remote receiver where some OTHER operator listens to the data and puts
it over the internet.
True - #2 doesn't actually make the QSO, but having that information (call
and frequency) certainly makes it a lot easier - especially if you are
having a hard time hearing the guy.
I worked the 9M4 this morning on 160... or at least I hope it was the
9M4. He never signed his callsign during the 10 minutes it took me to
work him - and I had to get to work.
> We are on a very slippery slope in saying that it is OK if the receiving
> antenna or station is in our own section or state or country. I can't find a
> way to interpret the rules to provide for this. Frankly, how are we going
> to catch someone doing any of these anyway...and even if we do, do we have
> the will to do something about it?
Impossible to check - and like other - I am sure it has been done before
and will be done again.
> I am tempted to say that it is unfair to use remote stations because it
> gives an unfair advantage but then I think of all the other unfair
> advantages that we have built into our contests. Although I have absolutely
> no evidence of this, I bet there are a few...some...one station already
> using or certainly experimenting with using remote receiving stations. I'm
> told that the latency time keeps us from operating effectively at distant
> locations. I suppose that it depends on what kind of networking system you
> have.
For me - again in non-contest situations - I have several choices to fix my
RX problem that I think I will have in 11 years (when the # of neighbors
within 2 miles of me will like go up by a factor of 100).
1. Move to a new QTH. This likely isn't going to happen with kids in school
and my wife hates to move - and we otherwise really enjoy where we live.
2. Give up DXing on 160 meters.
3. Use a remote receiving setup.
#3 would probably cost something in the order of $20K dollars - which seems
like a lot - but think of it as an investment in a piece of property that
will probably at least hold its value... so it is more like whatever the
payment is for it (think of it as rent) + the internet connection cost and
some power (or maybe solar power).
Considering the options - and the fact that DXing on 160 is something I
will probably continue doing - the for me - it is a reasonable choice.
It is something ANYONE could do if they wanted... just like they could
put up a big antenna if they wanted to bad enough. Is it an unfair
advantage in a contest? Maybe... but it's probably more fair if I am
trying to compete with someone who has a quiet QTH - or even someone
in W9 land who has much better propagation.
> Fortunately I sleep well at night, regardless.
This is really the issue - we all define what we think is fair for ourselves
and operate that way. Some people run power because they think everyone else
is and sleep at night.
For DX operation (non contest) operation, I would have no problem counting
countries I work if I have a remote receiving location somewhere in Oregon.
I would feel okay about sending cards that say the station worked Oregon.
Note that technically, I could count the QSOs I made from K1KI with my call
for DXCC... I choose not to do this - because "for me" that isn't what I
want to count for DXCC. For me, the line is the state border.
The question to think about - can I use that remote RX location during a
contest? Let's say it is my ONLY RX location that I use.
Does it matter if I TX there too? That would COST a lot more money to
pull off. The more economical solution is to TX from home and RX from
the other site. I would be happy to ONLY RX from that site - not using
both places.
I don't have solid 100 percent answers to these questions. It will take
some discussion to help hammer out something that comes close to what the
vast majority of people think is fair.
Tree N6TR
tree@kkn.net
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|