[CQ-Contest] Remote

Albert Crespo f5vhj at orange.fr
Thu Jun 20 08:51:26 EDT 2013

  The proposed rules allow for remote.
End of story.
I only proposed that the actual "operator" be in the same DXCC country 
as the TX and RX.
CQWW is supposed to be a competition.
However, what  about having a mult- multi with "operators" for each band 
sitting in their own home and accessing one station?
In other words, having a mulit-multi of dozen people or so, each at 
their own home, competing as one mult-mulit?
Under my proposed rule, K3LR could configure such a monster. Just think 
of whom he could muster from all over the USA who do not have to make 
the time and journey to his QTH?
It would bar the the same type of multi-mulit setup  with "operators" in 
the USA and the TX and RX  in  P4.
The tradition in Radio Sport competition evolves with time, but not 
being in the same country as the TX and RX is perhaps not the direction 
CQWW needs to go.
If you think going to Africa, spending the money , time  and putting up 
with conditions there  for a contest is  the  same as being at home, the 
term "home sweet home" does not apply to you.
73, Albert
------ Original Message ------
From: "N1MM" <tfwagner at snet.net>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Sent: 18/06/2013 19:10:14
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote
>The opponents don't want some well-heeled guy buying an oceanfront lot, 
>building a big contest station and beating the locals. People don't 
>like carpetbaggers. That's about it.
>Tom - N1MM
>On 6/18/2013 11:49 AM, Jim Rhodes wrote:
>>Why is this such a bitter pill for some people to swallow? The station 
>>in one location and that is the location that counts, That is where 
>>the RF
>>comes from and goes to. When you add the hardware to operate remote 
>>you are
>>also adding lag time into the mix and complexity that must be 
>>maintained on
>>BOTH ends. You are putting yourself at an operating disadvantage to 
>>get a scoring advantage. Or in my case just to get on the air for the
>>contest at all. I spend half of my time away from home working 
>>every other weekend. So the "purists" want to tell me I have to miss 
>>contests totally rather than get on the air and put out some Q's. 
>>Thanks a
>>On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> 
>>>Nothing has been said which persuades me that it is "bad" for the 
>>>to be remote from the station, whether the station is across town, 
>>>the state, across the continent, or across an ocean from the 
>>>I am not a rich man. Some day I may be reduced to a home without 
>>>for antennas to contest. Remote operation may be my only way to enjoy 
>>>radio. Why do you care where the radio is located, so long as the 
>>>entry reflects that location and the pertinent rules of the 
>>>body(ies) are observed.
>>>73, de Hans, K0HB
>>>In a message dated 6/17/2013 10:35:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>>f5vhj at orange.fr writes:
>>>Although the rich big boys would not like this rule, there should be 
>>>a rule
>>>that says:
>>>“The remote operator must be the same DXCC county as the operating
>>>location of the transmitters and receivers.”
>>>Short and sweet. Not ambiguous as to both elements, where Joe is and 
>>>the RF is transmitted and received.
>>>This will prevent Joe Blow from “renting” or using a station in a
>>>favourable location without having to have gone through the grief, 
>>>and money that would be expended otherwise.
>>>Radio Sport should not be based on how much money or how clever 
>>>can be to do less then the other person in order to compete.
>>>One person spend the time and energy to go to P4 and operates, a 
>>>person is remote into a station on P4.
>>>CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>>CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list