[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] K4VV in ARRL DX CW

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] K4VV in ARRL DX CW
From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: k9yc@arrl.net
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:03:24 -0800
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Wed,2/25/2015 8:09 PM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
It seems to me that the K4VV station was, in effect, a
private repeater, with access restricted to team members.

How in the world do you come up with that? It's simply a multi-multi contest station, like hundreds of others around the world, but with the operators NOT in the same room. No different from K3LR, W3LPL, N6RO, and so on. Guys fly in from all over the world to operate at K3LR. Lots of time and bucks spent on travel. For this K4VV operation, everyone stayed home and operated the K4VV station's transmitters via remote control. K3LR, W3LPL, N6RO, and other station owners get to chose their guest ops -- indeed, FCC Rules make them responsible for their stations.

There are some aspects of remote ham radio operation to get upset about, like guys on the west coast renting east coast stations to work EU and AF DXCC credits that are quite difficult from their home QTHs, and guys on the east coast renting west coast stations for the same advantage working west.

But the K4VV operation is NOT like that. It's a very legitimate multi-multi. And as someone on another reflector with considerable experience operating his own remote station via the internetnoted, those guys are working with the significant disadvantage of the latency of the internet connection. I've not done it myself yet, but he described it as often making CW quite difficult.

73, Jim K9YC

CQ-Contest mailing list

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