[CQ-Contest] CQ Magazine Award Policy for Remote Base Operations

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

There are so many other issues in remote operation that I doubt sitting 
in my USA shack is going to have any effect on my score in a positive 
way, opposed to sitting in the shack in J6.  If I were onsite I could 
walk outside and confirm where the antenna was pointing. fix things, 
etc.  If I fly down 3 wks prior to the contest I will not have any jet lag.

Remote shacks have inherent latency issues just to name one.

Are we not more interested in having more stations, mults to work in a 
contest?

How many people are really competing to win? Honestly.....

I went to J6 and knew from the start we were not going to win.  We got 
on to have a great time and we did.  I bet 95 percent of us operate 
contests because we enjoy it.  If we happen to win a plaque or paper 
award great.

Mike W0MU

W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net:23 or w0mu-1.dnsdynamic.com
Http://www.w0mu.com

On 6/21/2012 3:10 AM, Albert Crespo wrote:
> Is there the perception that   operating from a doggy  place where if you
> forget to use bottle water to brush your teeth can cause disease  is
> equivalent to operating from the comforts of  your own home?
> Fatigue is a big factor in a 48 hour contest  and having  a remote setup  is
> a clear advantage over someone who is not doing so.
> There are no travel or jet lag issues when operating from home. The list
> goes on and on on the side of being at the site.
> If people want to use remote, fine, but let's not kind anybody that is the
> same as being at the site.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 4:07 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Magazine Award Policy for Remote Base
> Operations
>
> I agree Ken.
>
> If I want to spend the money to build a remote station in J6 or HK or
> wherever and it is legal it should be allowed.  Where the operator sits
> is of little consequence.   The contacts are made with a STATION in J6
> or HK.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> W0MU-1 CC Cluster w0mu.net
>
> On 6/20/2012 5:36 PM, Ken Widelitz wrote:
>> CQ Magazine, June, 2012, Page 91:
>>
>> "Contacts with a remote base station are valid for all CQ contest and
>> award
>> purposes. Award applications by a remote base operator are permitted only
>> if
>> both the station (transmitters, receivers, and antennas) and the operator
>> are located in the same country (entity)."
>>
>> Are "contest" awards (certificates, plaques, trophies) "by a remote base
>> operator" covered by the second sentence? Since the first sentence
>> indicates
>> it covers contest contacts, it is implied that the second sentence does
>> also. Personally, I couldn't care less about CQ Magazine non-contest
>> awards,
>> but I do care about contest awards.
>>
>> If this policy applies to contests, it is a terrible policy. Policies
>> should
>> be implemented in order to have MORE entities to work in contests, not
>> less
>> (i.e., my understanding is that the 2 point NA QSO rule was implemented to
>> encourage Dxpeditions to NA entities.) Also, it would be another rule
>> where
>> it is almost impossible to detect a violation.
>>
>> What difference does it make where the operator is located when operating
>> a
>> remote station? In every case, the operator simply is not at the station
>> where transmitters, receivers, and antennas are located.
>>
>> 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT (not yet remotable, but most probably will be in the
>> future)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest