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 four squares and
rhombics, or for a relatively rare location for multiplier credit, etc.)
and
-- An amateur who sets up a remote station based on the limitations of his
living conditions (a rental that doesn't permit antennas or transmitters, a
retirement community doing the same, onerous CC&R's, etc.)
Before we bought the new QTH last year, W3WH made some suggestions to me to
consider for a remote station, since an antenna system at the rental
townhouse was not possible (I tried). One was to consider renting a very
small space, virtually a closet, at one of the "self-serve u-store" outfits.
Equip it with a rack for the equipment and remote control computer, put a
vertical on the roof, and get hooked into the internet somehow (wireless,
perhaps?) for control purposes. Luckily, the house came through long before
I had to give serious consideration to this thought. Now... would you
really force someone who's sole opportunity to operate was a situation akin
to this, to travel to that remote location to operate in a contest?
Sorry, no sale. I'm with Bob on this one.
73
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Robert Chudek -
K0RC
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 1:01 PM
To: Joe Subich, W4TV; 'Hal Offutt'; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations (was: Cheating
withTechnology)
I wouldn't be so quick to bind the operator to the physical station.
You need to look forward to entering "geezerdom". This is when your kids
wheel you off to the assisted living facility. You will be lucky to have a
computer and internet connection, let alone a transceiver and antennas.
Maybe there's a viable business plan for a retirement community for
contesters... you know, instead of a shuffleboard, a pool, and a golf
course, there's arrays of towers and yagis. The term "club house" would take
on a new meaning, where contest scores are posted on the bulletin boards for
mutual admiration among the residents.
Another business opportunity might be "time shared" remote stations. A
"small bankroll" could be turned into hundreds of remote stations setup for
these geezers to use. Operating from the comfort of my wheelchair, I could
operate my favorite contests without worry about lightning finding it's way
down my feedline as I send my final SK.
My wife is busy on the internet, looking for a retirement location. The idea
of having to resort to a remote controlled station is something I may need
to face in the not too distant future.
So what's the consensus? Remote stations can't participate in contesting? If
that's the ultimate decision, I need to start selling my equipment, now,
while it still has some value.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
To: "'Hal Offutt'" <hal@japancorporateresearch.com>;
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Technology
>
>> If the RF is coming from North Dakota, how can you say that
>> contacts with such a station are not from North Dakota? Why
>> does it matter where the operator is?
>
> The "contacts" are as much with the operator as with the "station."
> The operator is an integral part of the station and without the
> operator (at least until CW Skimmer develops the ability to answer
> the calls it hears) there is no contact.
>
> I know it has been popular to separate the operator and station
> for HF purposes but they are not separated for other purposes.
> For example, one may not contact a "repeater" for credit in a VHF
> contest nor can one claim credit for contacts through repeaters
> (except for satellite contacts in Field Day) in VHF/UHF contests.
> Similarly, contacts with "operators" using remote access techniques
> to reach a repeater are not permitted in VHF/UHF contests. A remote
> station is no different than a "repeater" with VoIP or other non-RF
> or non-Amateur means of access.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Hal Offutt
>> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:59 AM
>> To: cq-contest reflector
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating with Technology
>>
>>
>> N7ZG wrote:
>>
>> > On Remoting - If the transmitter, receiver and antennas are
>> within the
>> > designated station circle then why should anyone
>> > care where the operator is located. Managing communication
>> > latencies is a technical challenge. Does it advance the
>> > radio art? Maybe. It might likely break down some of the
>> > economic barriers to building large stations. This would be
>> > a good thing that advances contesting and dxing. Does it
>> > negatively impact the value of operator skill? I think not.
>>
>> W4TV replied:
>>
>> Because the operator is as much a part of the station as are
>> the transmitters, receivers, antennas and computers. Part of
>> building a station in an advantaged location is being there
>> to operate it - not operating from somewhere else. If one is
>> going to have a station in KL7 during ARRL DX, one should be
>> in KL7 during ARRL DX <G>. If one is going to have a station
>> in North Dakota during RTTY Roundup, one should be in North
>> Dakota during RTTY Roundup.
>>
>>
>> W1NN comments:
>>
>> If the RF is coming from North Dakota, how can you say that
>> contacts with such a station are not from North Dakota? Why
>> does it matter where the operator is?
>>
>> If I make contacts in SS by remotely operating a station in
>> ND while I am physically in Ohio, there are only two
>> conceivable possibilities for my QTH: either ND or OH. Would
>> it make any sense at all for me to give my section as OH?
>>
>> I don't see what "advantaged location" has to do with the
>> issue of remote
>> operating. Is there a difference if I remotely operate (from Ohio) a
>> station in PA compared with one in ND?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Hal W1NN
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|