[CQ-Contest] Remote Base

Mon Aug 22 00:41:35 EDT 2005

For many years now I have been amazed at the way a subject, any subject, can get so twisted that it loses its original meaning.
Bob I'm not picking on you but you said:""I felt that the comments were made in a more general sense than just towards
the NAQP.  For example, his reference to W6RJ running "outrageous power".  ""
In my original posting I was referring specifically to NAQP and mentioned nothing else. My subsequent reply was to WA7BNM referencing his remarks regarding updating the NAQP rules. I don't know how my remarks could have been considered general. As for my comments about Bob, W6RJ, I used W6RJ as an example of remotes that can be and are being used today. I have nothing but respect for Bob and everything Bob has accomplished. He has been for many, many, years a proven DX'er and contester. I believe he has earned everyone's respect. That being said today, in time, he is using a remote base located at one of the highest points in the State of California. In addition he is running at least a KW. That gives him an unfair, very unfair, advantage over everyone else. It his right to use his remote base and is legal in every respect. He can, and does, compete with the east coast hams on 80/75m openings to Europe not to mention crushing those of us out here in the west on any opening. If he lived up on the mountain it would be different, but he doesn't. Saturday a friend of my was giving out points during NAQP from his house, on the east coast, via a remote TS2000 on a hilltop in Southern CA. I want guys w/remote stations to be able to contest, I want technology to move forward. But, at the same time, I think remotes need to be defined and some way segregated from the overwhelming majority who don't have remote capability.
WA7BNM has said they are aware of the remotes and will be working on rules changes. I have every confidence Bruce will get it right and am willing to wait for the new/modified rules. 
Best 73

MAL         N7MAL
Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Naumann - W5OV 
  To: 'W2RU - Bud Hippisley' ; n7mal at CITLINK.NET ; 'Richard Thorne' 
  Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:13
  Subject: RE: Remote Base


  I felt that the comments were made in a more general sense than just towards
  the NAQP.  For example, his reference to W6RJ running "outrageous power".  

  I also think that the rules I quoted convey a basic understanding that I
  think most would presume would apply in all contests.  Specifically, for
  something as fundamental as a station definition and limits.  If we don't
  all agree on something that basic, something is seriously wrong.

  The NAQP, you have to remember, and I know you do, was originally the CD
  Party sponsored by ARRL.  I suspect that not including such rules were an
  oversight when the NAQP was established independently, rather than
  intentionally opening the door to allowing for remote receiver sites in
  multiple time zones in the NAQP for example.  I do think it would do the
  NAQP good to adopt the ARRL general rules as applying to the NAQP as well in
  order to help avoid this sort of "it's not specifically mentioned in the
  rules" stuff.  

  I also don't see any harm in the use of remote stations, as long as they
  abide by the rules (CQ and/or ARRL).

  Bob W5OV

  -----Original Message-----
  From: W2RU - Bud Hippisley [mailto:W2RU at frontiernet.net] 
  Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 7:30 PM
  To: 'Bob Naumann - W5OV'; n7mal at CITLINK.NET; 'Richard Thorne'
  Subject: RE: Remote Base

  > -----Original Message-----
  > From: Bob
  > Naumann - W5OV

  > What Bruce says is correct.  On what basis are you challenging his 
  > statement?
  > Contest rules do not allow for remote receiver sites.

  Not to be obtuse, Bob, but the contest rules you quoted are for ARRL and CQ
  contests.  I find nothing in the four web pages of NAQP rules that tackles
  the topic or ties NAQP rules in any way to ARRL's rules.  I think Mal's
  point is well-taken for NAQP, which is what the original question pertained

  Bud, W2RU 

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list