daleputnam at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 19 16:53:32 EDT 2013
Will someone.. explain to me.. please? How it is that with a remote station.. the rf starts at your home station,
gets transferred to the remote station... via rf.. then retransmitted again.. as rf...Please explain how this is wrong?
That is the simple explanation of a repeater operation.
Remote operation is the control.. and either cw keying, digital stream, or voice.. is sent via a network, (landline or fiber or satellite) to the remote tx.. then transmitted.. as rf... into the ether.. as a radio signal.
This is a remote station.
So.. the discussion is to limit sending voice and control data via network or cables... to a remote transmitter for transmission as a rf signal. That has been done for well over 50 years.... with remote base stations. Now the lines get
a bit longer is all So.. we fussin over the length of line?.. the cost of hooking it up?... the fact that someone figured out how to do it and save money over exposure to who knows what .."over there" .. bet they have to go there to set it up.. or at least someone does.
Back to my original queston.. explain how is it that a remote station.. (remote base) is wrong? The government does it.. .. I know, I know.. bad example.. many many commercial interests do it every day.... your tv signal does it... your music radio does it.. your background music does it.. and if you listen to XMS or SeriusXM.. they do it. So how is that bad, again, please?
Have a great day,
Dale - WC7S in Wy
> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:56:41 +0100
> From: pokane at ei5di.com
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote
> Jim W2LC has raised a number of valid issues that would
> be better dealt with by the Contests Advisory Committee
> and the DXCC Advisory Committee.
> Some of the issues are complex, and will require the
> involvement of the IARU, and the regulatory authorities
> in each country concerned.
> It should not be assumed that the relatively liberal
> regulations applying to remote operation in the States
> apply elsewhere. For example, CEPT arrangements do not
> permit remote operation of a station by a person located
> in another country.
> Paul EI5DI
> On 19/06/2013 18:12, w2lc at twcny.rr.com wrote:
> > 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
More information about the CQ-Contest