[CQ-Contest] SO2R REMOTE CONTESTING

[Russell Hill]

It has been written by Joe, and others in the same vein:


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv at subich.com>
To: "'Eric Hilding'" <dx35 at hilding.com>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Cc: <nccc at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:06 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R REMOTE CONTESTING


> My personal prejudices are that the operator should also be
> within the "circle" but that may not be practical for some
> people.  However, in any case, the operator should be within
> the same entity (or contest multiplier).  Thus an operator
> in the US should not be permitted to run a DX contest remotely
> from the Caribbean or other "DX" location ... an operator in
> Florida should not do Sweepstakes remotely from VY1 ... even
> an operator in Ohio should not contest remotely from WV.
>
> Still, those "political" issues are separate from the technology
> questions.
>
> 73,
>
>   ... Joe, W4TV


It occurs to me that requiring the remote operator to be in the same 
multiplier entity might have unexpected ramifications.  Would this mean that 
in a VHF/UHF conttest the remote op would have to be in the same grid 
square?  If counties are the multiplier does he have to be in the same 
county?  For county hunters, would a contact be invalid if the remote op 
were in the next county?  What about the case where a grid boundary cuts 
through a county-- the usual case, in other words?  Would the remote station 
be forced to be built within the portion of the resident county which is 
also within the same grid so as to cover all possible cases?  How about 
IOTA?  Has to be on the same island?  (I don't know why, but someone might 
want to and figure out how to put a remote station on Matagorda Island off 
the Texas coast.)

I am not a VHF/UHFer, nor am I contemplating a near future remote station. 
But as I read the posts, it seems to me that from the perspective of being 
an operator who works Aruba as DX or in a contest that I do not care where 
the operator of that station is actually sitting, I worked Aruba if that is 
legitimately where the station is located.  I wonder if a friend phoned to 
tell me I could contact Aruba, might I expect him to tell me:
    1.  "Aruba is on the air"
    2.  "A station in Aruba is on the air"
or 3.  "An operator in Aruba is on the air"?

If a Mars Lander sends back pictures under remote control from Earth, are 
the pictures less validly from Mars because there was no human present?

I don't know the answers, but these seem to me to be valid questions before 
a hasty precedent either way is set.

73 to all,
Rusty, na5tr