CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations

To: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>, cq-contest reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations
From: <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:08:10 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi Mike,
You're reading a whole lot into this based on your own perceptions. I choose to 
read only what is there. If that's not good 
enough for the sponsor, they can clarify.

The "address" bit was included after hams in Hungary tried to argue that 
because a communist state owns everything in 
the country, the property boundaries of any station in Hungary extended all the 
way to the country's borders. 

Here, they tried to exploit that to allow multi-multi stations, operating as 
one station, spread across Hungary. 

Even with a remote operation, the 500-meter rule would be required to prevent 
the above.

Also, who owns the station? If I remote to K0EJ, all the RF-generating and 
radiating equipment is on the station owner's 
property, just as if he were at the controls. Again, no mention that I, 
personally, have to be at K0EJ.

The intent of the 500-meter rule is to contain all RF-generating and radiating 
equipment to ONE station.  There is no 
mention of the operator needing to be present at that station. The 500-meter 
rule impacts remote operation only in one 
way: you couldn't remote to a station AND use a local receiver. (A W6 remoting 
to Maine but listening for Asia on his 
California receiver.)

The only reading of any rule that really counts is the literal reading of what 
is actually printed. There's no way to 
reasonably try to get into the author's head. What isn't specifically forbidden 
is not specifically forbidden.

The 500-meter rule does not exist to prohibiit remote operations. 

73, kelly
ve4xt


> 
> From: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
> Date: 2008/03/18 Tue AM 11:52:20 CDT
> To: cq-contest reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting using remote stations
> 
> 
> On Mar 17, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Jim Rhodes wrote:
> 
> > It certainly does not.
> 
> I certainly respectfully disagree!
> 
> > 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 transmitters and  
> > receivers.Doesn't even mention that the antennas have to be.  
> > However, by not mentioning transceivers (using your logic) does  
> > that mean I have to dig up a set of Drake twins to enter?
> >
> 
> >>
> >> Transmitters and receivers must be
> >> located within a 500 meter diameter circle
> >> or within the property limits of the station
> >> licensee?s address, whichever is
> >> greater. All antennas used by the entrant
> >> must be physically connected by wires to
> >> the transmitters and receivers used by the
> >> entrant.
> >
> 
>       I've said it before, and I'll say it again. All rules are meant to  
> be interpreted, because there is no such thing as a completely  
> unambiguous rule.
>       While we can armchair lawyer what  the rules say, lets look at what  
> they don't say, or try to divine some intent from them. Let's break  
> it down:
> 
> 
> >> Transmitters and receivers must be
> >> located within a 500 meter diameter circle
> 
>       So let's assume that remote stations are allowed.
> 
>       Why on earth would a 500 meter circle be of any importance if the  
> location of the station could be anywhere? Transmitters and receivers  
> have to be within 500 meters even if they are a thousand miles away  
> and controlled by the internet? Right there is the big clue to what  
> they are thinking.
> 
> >>
> >> or within the property limits of the station
> >> licensee?s address, whichever is
> >> greater.
> 
> Okay, now we're starting to see something interesting here. If a  
> person has a big property, they can have a bigger separation between  
> antennas and radios. The licensee's address thing is a little  
> awkward. Some wag might insist that the licensees away from home  
> property that would support a larger than 500 meter radius wasn't  
> eligible because the home address wouldn't. A moot point, but I've  
> seen people argue on more outlandish points.
> 
> 
> >> All antennas used by the entrant
> >> must be physically connected by wires to
> >> the transmitters and receivers used by the
> >> entrant.
> 
> 
>       Okay, now this might seem to be a "DUH" moment, but what are they  
> trying to say here? Keeping in mind that this rule was almost  
> certainly written before the concept of having a station at some site  
> that is unattended, and controlled via the internet, it looks like  
> they want the entrant AT the station. One could try to wordsmith this  
> one by saying that the wires in his home are connected to other  
> wires, which are connected to other wires, ad nauseam.
> 
> So I read it as "not allowed" in the present state of things. They  
> want you AT the station, and they want the station fitting within a  
> 500 meter circle, or what your property supports.
> 
> Now that technology has made the rule a little muddy with modes of  
> operation that weren't likely available when it was written, it  
> should be revisited, with some specific attention paid to the advent  
> of internet controlled stations. But it still might come back that  
> they weren't allowed. I would/will allow remote stations in my  
> contest because I think the technology is interesting. I also suspect  
> that really top notch contesters will find remote operating  
> frustrating due to latency, as will the people working them.
> 
> Want to see what I think are a well written set of rules?
> 
> http://www.nittany-arc.net/Web%20Packages/parules2005.html
> 
> Granted I wrote them, so I'm tooting my own horn, but when I took  
> over the rules were one page of fairly small type.
> 
> After much consternation on the part of Ops, I re-wrote the rules,  
> adding definitions, updating rules for technology change, and trying  
> to make everything as clear as possible. Now the rules are 9 pages  
> long, admittedly with bigger type, but still a lot more to read.
> 
> It goes a long way toward eliminating discussions such as this, but  
> don't doubt that people could tear it apart also. 8^)
> 
> -73 de Mike N3LI -
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>