When multiple streaming receive sites are approved for competition, I
expect that DSP software will be developed to sum the signals and subtract
the noise and QRM. I'm not sure how well this would work for voice, but it
should work for cw/rtty.
Art
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Frank Bogers - ON9CC / PA9A <pa9a@live.nl>
wrote:
> Hi Tree, all,
>
> I believe there 's a third basic issue here:
>
> 3. The change of the leveling playing field
>
> Adaptions of shortcuts introduces new opportunities within the rules.
>
> Although the Remote RX station is initially meant to serve those who are
> hampered by local noise in the city, others will make use of it as well,
> changing the leveled playing field. One has to plan his Remote RX location
> strategically. Within the rules there now is an advantage by gaining from
> propagation and/or geographical differences.
> Most top stations have good locations, but there is always a
> better/quieter one within 100km. Even 10 - 30 kms can make a difference
> working the weak ones, using diversity. Audio latency can be solved by DSP.
>
> Please let me explain and use my current situation as a "possible example'.
>
> I run a small sized contest station in a small town. During winter time I
> am allowed to use the field of my neighbour farmer to setup several full
> sized beverages in all directions. It all works fb and offers me very
> satisfying results.
>
> With the new Remote RX possibility, to be competitive I am forced to do
> the allowed upgrade and add two RX sites:
> - One to the max west border right near the sea. This allows for easier
> working of more QRP stations from the British Islands and secondly it
> delivers a propagation advantage towards W/VE.
> - The second one will be at the south border, up in the hills at a top
> location which is even more quiet than my current QTH and offers the right
> downslope to create superb take-off from an 8-circle or so.
>
> I will not be the only station designing such an upgrade, within the new
> rules.
> Someone in France will have ST1 in Bretagne at the sea and ST2 near
> Nice(Italy), similar for the Germans who will have to install ST1 at the
> North-Sea near Hamburg, and ST2 beyond Munich near the OE-border. Other
> countries might have less available strategic geographical opportunities.
> Now let's see how many stations will (have to) upgrade in the next two
> years...
>
>
> Another possible scenario is that the competition will even move it's
> remote RX station to another continent. That's even 'better' and if you
> need to setup remote RX set it up as far away as you can (where is the
> limit?). So they have an advantage by taking the shortcut, while others do
> what HAM radio and Topband is all about.
>
>
> So my answer to the first basic issue: the whole contesting game will be
> affected and as such Remote RX should not be allowed during 160m contests.
> Topband will loose a lot of it's flair and I think most of us like 160m
> because it's a challenge ...
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> 73
> Frank
> ON9CC
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|