w2lc at twcny.rr.com
w2lc at twcny.rr.com
Wed Jun 19 13:12:29 EDT 2013
On 18/06/2013 16:49, Jim Rhodes wrote:
> Why is this such a bitter pill for some people to swallow? The station is in one location and that is the location that counts
Paul EI5DI wrote: . . . . . The bottom line is they're different, very different.
I agree Paul
So Paul, let’s take this a step further: the technology exists today to place a station capable of remote operation on each and every DXCC entity in the world. So let’s go ahead and do that, and place all of those 325 or so remote stations. So instead of travelling to some remote location, everyone can remote to the DX station and operate. Life is good.
This may be an exaggeration for 325 countries but remote station operation is being done in many countries right now.
Now, if you “work” one of those remote stations, are you working “someone” in that DXCC entity, province, county or state? No. The equipment may be there but the operator is not.
Would working a remotely operated station located in the US be approved for DXCC? Yes, I believe that has happened already. Working the remote station of K2DB in NNY has been allowed in SS for NNY credit.
But what if that remote station is located on Clipperton? Would that contact be approved?
If I remotely operate some DX entity, am I a legal entry for that country or the contest?
I don’t think so, I don’t have a license to operate from that country.
Thus a DQ in the contest. CEPT aside for the moment, since it does not cover every country.
If I work, say Paul EI5DI, who is operating a DX entity by remote, can I not then just remote in myself and work that same DX entity? i.e. Work myself? Why not? If there is no need for an operator to be there, then why not work yourself? Is there a rule for not working yourself? There might be.
Is working a remote piece of equipment, at a possibly uninhabited place, what we are looking to do?
Eh, I’m not feelin’ it Paul, how about you?
73 Scott W2LC
W2LC at twcny.rr.com
More information about the CQ-Contest