David, et. al.,
The FCC says that RHR is not "radio for hire" and therefore
legal (for USA hams). The ARRL Board Of Directors, with
the EXCEPTION of Delta Division Director Norris, and 1st
VP Roderick, voted for allowing RHR for ARRL awards.
The BOD determined that it was up to the individual to
weigh the moral ethics behind use or non use of RHR.
One prominent local DXer was caught using RHR during a
recent contest stating he was in our local area when
the RHR was located in another CQ Zone. Ethics??? I
think not. His 160M DXCC totals skyrocketed within a single
year when hams in his local area were using competition
grade 160M stations had no propagation he seemed to have.
Bottom line: RHR is controlled by individuals with
DEEP pockets/wallets. The ARRL BOD, for the most part,
are not DX-ers and have no concept of the DXCC awards
programs and effects of uneducated rules changes.
One solution: Write your ARRL BOD member, and all other
ARRL Directors, voice your educated opinion based on
solid facts. Demand change.
As far as non-USA hams using USA based RHR, complain
to the FCC to see what they can do.
I have my asbestos undies on...
73 & Best DX
Charlie
WD5BJT
See September 2006 CQ Magazine for a published work.
www.qsl.net/wd5bjt
-----Original Message-----
>From: David Raymond <daraymond@iowatelecom.net>
>Sent: Feb 4, 2015 11:45 AM
>To: TopBand <topband@contesting.com>
>Subject: Topband: Foreign stns using NA remotes for K1N
>
>I mentioned last week that we would be seeing over seas stations using US
>based remotes stations to work K1N. It was mentioned here that this won't
>happen, and that the US remote station operators monitor this activity
>carefully and do not permit it. Well, it is happening. I have personally
>witnessed on IT9 station and one JA station using clearly NA based remote
>stations to work K1N on 160m. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg.
>It's rather obvious when they are on 160m and are 20 or 30 db stronger than
>the din of the DX stations calling. There will be more. Incidentally, they
>were not signing at /W#, /K#, etc. Realistically it's probably not
>preventable but saddening.
>
>In the meantime, I think the K1N ops are doing nothing short of a fabulous
>job. Excellent Q rates, good job managing the piles, deftly QSYing to dodge
>DQRM, all the while being quite cheerful and courteous. Bravo!
>
>73. . . Dave, W0FLS
>_________________
>Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|