[CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?

[Trent and Lorraine Sampson]

 By our definitions (VK) the operator holds a  Certificate of
Proficiency to operate a station. The station is licensed to a location
so VK4TI is licensed to my home address but technically can be operated
by others holding the necessary certificates' the callsign is the
station not the operator, using this logic if I held a remote licence
for YJ0AX and operated via the net the QSO is still with the station in
YJ0 and a valid QSO.

M2CW

 Trent and Lorraine Sampson
| PO Box 1647 | Toowoomba QLD  | 4350| Mobile 0408 497550
Ham Radio Call Sign : VK4TI

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Paul J. Piercey
Sent: Wednesday, 21 March 2007 5:23 AM
To: 'Paul O'Kane'; CQ-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Paul O'Kane
> Sent: March 20, 2007 08:35
> To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] When is a QSO not a QSO?
> 
> Was "Remote Site Contesting Rules - Getting out of hand".
> 
> > --- "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey at nl.rogers.com> wrote:
>  
> > My point is that when I make contact with a station, even in a 
> > contest, it's the operator that I am working, not the equipment.
> 
> Paul is right. Amateur radio, and contesting in particular, is a 
> point-to-point (single-point to single-point), person- to-person, 
> solely-RF-based technology.
> 
> Any deviation from this, regardless of how much fun or how convenient 
> or how technically advanced it may be, serves only to dilute the 
> achievement of completing the QSO.  Repeater QSOs are an example of 
> "dilution".
> 
> With sufficient dilution we are eventually reduced to the level of 
> EchoLink, Skype and cellphones - all great fun, all highly technically

> advanced, but not amateur radio.
> 
> > --- "Ken Alexander" <k.alexander at rogers.com> wrote:
> 
> > Sorry, no sale Paul.  If I had a ham friend in KH6 who let
> me operate
> > his station remotely . . . At the end of the contest, if
> you'd worked
> > me you would have worked KH6, not VE3.
> 
> Ken is right in that Paul would have worked KH6.  But, ultimately, he 
> is wrong because it's not a valid amateur radio QSO - it's a step 
> towards EchoLink or Skype.
> 
> There's a fundamental issue here - at what stage does a "QSO" 
> become something else?  I suggest, for contesting purposes, it's when 
> the operator(s), and all equipment and antennas, are not physically 
> located within a circle of 500 metres diameter.
> 
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI

Thanks, Paul. I can live with that.

I would even be more lenient in allowing that any remote operation has
to be confined to a call area (for contests like SS, it would be
confined to areas used as multipliers). It's pretty broad but satisfies
my concern that the person (me, for example, as a VO1) is not
misrepresenting him/herself as being in another location when they are
physically not. When you work me, you work a VO1 in VO1. It satisfies
the issues that ops with these insane restrictions placed upon how they
utilize their own property have. If I lived in an apartment building but
owned a property 100 miles away (still in
VO1) then I can set up a station there and go to it when I want to or
operate it remotely when I want to do that. No problem.

But, like you say, if the object of the exercise is to just talk to
people regardless of where they are, then use Echolink, Skype, or the
telephone. I got involved with amateur radio to talk to people directly
in distant lands as opposed to neighbours who have radios in foreign
lands. Point to point communications is the key.

As far as I'm concerned, the guys who are championing the DX remote
stations are simply looking for a problem to solve with their solution.
Either that or they are manufacturing a problem where none now exists.

73 -- Paul VO1HE


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest