Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests

To: "John Crovelli" <w2gd@hotmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests
From: "Mark van Wijk, PA5MW" <pa5mw@home.nl>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 22:48:24 +0100
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
I have contributed in the past to some of the Remote RX discussions and at some 
point felt all was said.
But I let me ‘wrap up’ some of them and based on general topics, vent my 
opinion here.


FUN
That is what this hobby is about, right?
This is more focusing on the psychic level and can be had at any kind of 
station and/or level of achievement.
It does require you to do a reality check, verify which kind of personal or 
shared result you like best, and how to leverage reasonable goals.
Opposed to the need for peer recognition, demand respect (WTF is that in a 
hobby??) or crush the top 3 opponents, whatever it takes.

Contesting since ‘87, has convinced me and my Hamradio friends; “it’s all about 
enjoying the path”. But you knew that already, right?


ENDING IN THE TOP 10 IN CONTESTING
Contesting is a superb mix between casual participants, enjoying the numerous 
possibilities of a contest, giving some points, scoring that rare one. And then 
there is the top level who compete at Olympic level and have similar focus and 
dedication.
Like at serious sports levels; you need some talent, but MUCH more years of 
practice, learning by doing....a lot.
The achievement comes from what you personally put into it.
Not taking any “shortcut”.


THIS HOBBY IS ABOUT TECHNICAL ADVANCEMENT, INNOVATION
Damned well it is!
It does not matter whether you are an XXL topband competitor owning a big 
station, or you participate from a tiny home-QTH in the city, like me.
From end of March till October  you do need to review, analyze, plan, 
investigate, experiment week by week, to get to a better result next time.
At my new QTH, starting with 3 different small RX antennas, the first time I 
ended up somewhere in the #40’s  during CQWW-160-CW. The next time after a lot 
of experiments, using other RX antennas (because local noise raised 8-15dB), 
diversity RX with another special designed antenna and zillion changes in and 
around my shack, I ended #13. This took me lots of design&work, which was 
monthly organized in a planning file (XLS available on request).

Same for our club-station. At numerous occasions the team built and tested 
antennas. Tried the new antennas during other available contests. Rebuilt the 
whole shack again and again, took it to the next level in contesting. Both 
incremental and major station improvements are needed to get you and the team 
forward. At many levels we would educate ourselves to sharpen both our 
knowledge and operator qualities.
At the University of Technology in Eindhoven (PI4TUE) we enjoyed our antennas 
being >220ft AGL at a gigantic roof. But the QTH also proved to be a serious 
noise challenge on the lowbands. It took 8 (!) years of experimenting to have a 
well working Lowband RX antenna. 
Did we need a “shortcut” at that? Hell no! 
PI4TUE was active in contesting for some 23 years. The large, high building was 
recently closed. That allows us for finding new opportunities in the future 
next to remembering the many happy hours of designing, building and contesting.

Innovation, thinking out of the box, experimenting, incremental improvements at 
all possible disciplines at your station is a must.

There should not be a shortcut, just because it’s an easy way out.


REMOTE RX STATIONS BEING A NOVEL TECHNICAL CHALLENGE.
Yes by all means.
In fact, we OWN one for some 6 years now. We have been using it during many 
experiments at home to compare our city antennas against the very quiet remote 
rx site. But during a contest we refuse the “shortcut” and travel the 60 miles 
and build a TX antenna on the site as well. 
Just today we built a fieldday-style contest station at that site, preparing 
for the ladies of PI4YLC for their next weekends’ RDXC participation. 

That is a leveled effort solution.
Opposed to an internet shortcut.



THE NOISE CHALLENGED CITY DWELLERS
That is me too. I measure background noise for 4 years now and have seen it 
rising from minimal 8 to 15dB, depending on the direction. Noise cancellation 
(NCC-1 available) does help only few dB because of the many noise sources and 
directions. 
I understand that some have no option here and will build a remote rx site to 
accommodate their needs. That is ok at your every day’s QSO, DX’ing, working 
that rare one etc.. Everyone’s own choice. But NOT for a game like competitive 
contesting. 

Giving in to the new shortcut because...they demand it?
Please re-think about what exactly are the true initial goals for this game you 
want to change so drastically for some who say they cannot come to play. Put 
them in a separate category if you really must.



NO TO REMOTE RX  IN CONTESTING
For contesting, using a remote rx is NOT an option. 
It will add many unrealistic advantages, like inband/duplex receiving. 
Something which is already available but requiring advanced station design and 
filtering. And then there is many opportunities of possible abuse using remote 
RX sites during a contest. Such can not be detected

It is OK having built successfully mastered a remote Rx site.
But please, during a contest (only), walk the extra mile and take your butt to 
the remote location as well.
If you can manage building such a remote station, a TX antenna will be possible 
too.  


73 Mark, PA5MW












From: John Crovelli 
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 8:03 PM
To: Mark van Wijk, PA5MW ; topband@contesting.com 
Subject: RE: Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests

Mark, 


Unless others speak up, N2NT is inclined to change the rules and allow remote 
RX systems.


So the time is NOW  to make your thoughts known on the reflector.


73,


John 



_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>