[CQ-Contest] Remote contest operation

[Jim Rhodes]

I keep expecting Paul to object to running connected to the grid. We should
all just have B+ and V+ batteries. Don't you know they use the internet to
keep the power flowing.


On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Bob Naumann <W5OV at w5ov.com> wrote:

> Paul,
>
> Your objection to any use of the Internet or commercial telecomm facilities
> in any ham radio activity is well known.  You've been grinding the same
> flawed axe for years.
>
> I'm sure we would agree, however, that the use of a remote receiver would
> be
> completely unsportsmanlike as defined by many contest and award program
> rules - including the CQWW. But, that is not what we're discussing here.
>
> And, despite your persistence in continuing to grind that tired old axe,
> none of what you're complaining about actually impacts the "RF" aspect of
> the "amateur-band-RF-all-the-way contesting" you seek to protect.
>
> In your preferred configuration, we have the traditional "base" or "home"
> station configuration:
>
> Operator -> [Interface stuff] -> {Radio -> Antenna -> Atmosphere}
>                                                         {      Amateur  RF
> all the way          }
>
> The Interface between operator and his radio consists of headphones,
> microphones, keyers, computers and other devices.
>
> In a remote operation, not one piece of the "amateur-band-RF-all-the-way"
> portion changes in any way.
>
> The diagram of a remote operation is precisely the same:
>
> Operator -> [Interface stuff] -> {Radio -> Antenna -> Atmosphere}
>                                                         {      Amateur  RF
> all the way          }
>
> What changes? The Interface stuff between the Operator and the Radio is all
> that changes.
>
> In this case, the Interface now includes long wires, UHF or microwave
> links,
> some digital telecomm facilities, and other stuff.  Again, none of this is
> changing the "Amateur RF all the way" in any way.
>
> So, your premise is completely without merit.
>
> If you feel that using technologies such as the Internet and others in the
> Operator to Radio interface portion of the configuration, then let's
> discuss
> that - but let's be honest that it does not alter the RF at all.
>
> I don't see any tangible difference in using a 6' piece of wire between the
> operator and the front of a radio or a 600 mile connection via a network.
>
> Nothing on the front of the radio impacts what goes on at the back of the
> radio. Again, all of the "RF all the way" stuff is not changed and
> certainly
> not enhanced in any way.
>
> Propagation does not change, noise does not get reduced, and frankly,
> someone using an extended interface to their radio puts themselves at a
> disadvantage to anyone not choosing to do so.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Paul O'Kane
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 1:59 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote contest operation
>
>
> Over the last few days, this thread has included
> the terms listed below.
>
> I don't recognise amateur radio contesting in
> any of them.  Most are technical terms specific
> to the internet, a public communications utility.
> Whatever relevance the internet has to contesting
> in general, in remote contest operation it serves
> only to replace or displace amateur-band RF
> between contesters.
>
> Those who choose, or are obliged, to get on the
> internet before they get on the air are doing
> something fundamentally different from the rest
> of us.  We're all entitled to do what we please,
> but we're not entitled to do what we please and
> call it what we please.  Internet-dependent
> contesting is not the same as amateur-band-RF-
> all-the-way contesting, even when the operators
> at the far end can't tell the difference and
> when contest sponsors ignore the difference.
>
> Read, and despair :-)
>
>    VPN
>    packet-loss
>    delay-spikes
>    traffic prioritisation
>    network path
>    audio-streaming
>    intermediate server
>    restrictive ISPs
>    peer-to-peer
>    client download
>    participating client
>    firewall
>    port restrictions
>    server and client
>    public IP
>    VPS
>    encrypted traffic
>    packet inspection
>    throttling
>    dropped packets
>    latency issues
>    56mb download speeds
>    routing
>    incoming packets
>    ADSL
>    fail over to 3G
>    Skype
>    cyberworld
>    jitter
>    realtime audio over UDP
>    4G LTE connection
>    traffic shaping issues
>    point-to-point microwave
>    local service provider
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Jim K0XU
jim at rhodesend.net