Now, consider this: We keep talking about remote RX, and the attendant
problems of getting full SDR data back to the main station where the
operator is located. Lets flip this around. Lets move the operator to
the
receive site, and move the transmitter 100 miles away. That way, we only
need low bandwidth - keying data, TX audio, and perhaps TX antenna
switching. Does THIS change things at all?
In other words - use the full receiving capabilities of your current
station, and take away transmitter hash. Poof! No longer an issue,
because the TX is now 100 miles away...
This is a serious game changer in my books, and needs a serious rethink
before we say "hmmm - OK - old guys need this - no problem - sounds
fine..."
People are putting far too much emotion in this. It is a technical issue.
The technology to do this at one site is not all that difficult.
Get a K3 and a reasonable amplifier, and you have minimal composite noise on
site. Phase-null the TX antenna out of the RX antenna ahead of any RX
amplification, and you can get down to noise floor at 1500 watts with
reasonable spacing.
Even if the transmitter is nulled, the contact advantage is minimal in a 160
contest. The reason is any good station will run the band nearly dry of
contacts. You pick up far more contacts with the operator going slow at slow
times to get slow stations than someone would ever get by duplex. The
primary advantage to duplex is in multi-op, where an operator can be
dedicated to moving up and down the band picking people off. Successful
multi-ops already have space to duplex, at least to some reasonable extent.
The real advantage to remote or split site is a better noise or antenna
environment. What we should be debating are the real facts and effects, not
what we want to be the facts.
As for DXCC, since sometime in the 1990's (as I recall), we could legally
move anywhere or operate anywhere and collect DXCC. Prior to that, it was
not unheard of for people to call people on the phone to "help" them get a
new country. 160 meters for many years had a phone-a-friend list. I recall
that going on in various forms since the 1970's, at least. Suddenly, it is a
major problem that will ruin radio as we know it!
The most tragic thing I recall in Ham radio was hearing W8UDN, Ed, (a
person I rarely spoke to) actually crying on the radio when he was losing
his 160 station. Listening to Ed's open distress and sadness at no longer
being able to enjoy something he loved for most of his life turned a page
for me.
If letting someone who loves radio operate a radio, however he can manage to
do it, without unfairly taking away from other's ability to enjoy what they
want, I'm all for it.
I think anyone who bases their success or value in life by how they rank in
something as silly as a national DXCC list, or worrying about someone making
50 more contacts in a contest, deserves all the angst and distress worrying
about others creates for them.
I hope the people who write rules eventually let people like VO1HP enjoy
radio, instead of false concerns. Radio is all the better when we help each
other, instead of holding someone like Ed back.
73 Tom
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|