I think a more practical "Station Location and Boundary, <b)" rule
would be to have the RX and TX located in either "in the same grid
square" or "within 100 KM" and of course within the same DXCC
Entity.
I think 500 meters is more than enough of a "circle" to contain both
transmit and receive antennas. If one is making the effort to create
a remote site, it can certainly contain both transmit and receive
antennas. The idea of placing the transmitter *for an amateur station*
on a salt marsh on the coast and the receive antennas 10 miles distant
and well away from man made noises (to the extent possible) is ludicrous
- it reminds me of the commercial maritime stations of old.
Frankly, the DXCC rules should be changed to limit all operators to
*ONE* location a month unless the operator is physically present at
the station (as defined by the 500 meter circle) to prevent the near
simultaneous use of multiple remote transmitters/receivers in physically
large DXCC entities to "feed" a single DXCC/Challenge/Single Band DXCC
from propagation advantaged locations.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2018-11-21 12:37 PM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote:
I'd like to see the ARRL change part <b) to address the needs of the Amateur
Radio Community in light of the recent radical increase in electrical noise
from consumer switching power supplies, variable speed motors, LED lighting,
solar panels with "optimizers", and all of the other "energy efficient"
wideband RF garbage generators.
I think a more practical "Station Location and Boundary, <b)" rule would be
to have the RX and TX located in either "in the same grid square" or "within
100 KM" and of course within the same DXCC Entity.
I also think that building and maintaining a shared Community Low Noise RX
Receiver Site would make a great DX Club project and service.
Let's get this rule updated. How do we get started?
73
Lloyd - N9LB
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|