[CQ-Contest] New Contesting Classification

[Jeff AC0C]

I believe your QTH is determined by where the antenna is, not where you are 
physically.

73/jeff/ac0c
www.ac0c.com
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie

-----Original Message----- 
From: Jeff Draughn
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 10:49 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] New Contesting Classification

I don't know much about remote contesting, so if I am sitting in Kansas and
operating a station in Virginia where is my score posted with the folks in
VA or KS. ?
Thanks
Jeff

On Sunday, September 11, 2016, Jim Brown <k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com> wrote:

> I strongly disagree. I'm lucky enough to have my own station -- I own a
> large plot of land and have built a nice antenna farm, so I'm happy
> operating from home. But MANY hams do NOT have that luxury -- they live on
> small plots of land, or in housing developments where, by conditions of
> their purchase or rental of the property, are NOT PERMITTED to have any
> antennas. And there are MANY hams who are surrounded by neighbors with
> multiple noise sources that make it difficult to hear all but the 
> strongest
> signals on a band.
>
> If you are one of those MANY hams who cannot build even a modest antenna
> system, the only thing available to you is remote operation.
>
> Moreover, you clearly misunderstand remote operation. Communication IS via
> radio. The internet is no different from a telephone link to a remote 
> site,
> or a radio link to a remote site. Several years ago, K3NA, W3DQ, and I
> visited an old "ship to shore" HF and MF station north of San Francisco.
> There are two sites about 20 miles apart, one for TX and one for RX, each
> equipped with multiple rhombics. The two sites are linked by a dedicated
> landline that carries multiple CW channels as audio tones of different
> frequencies, one for each transmitter. That station dates back to 1913 --
> see this link for a description of the station.
>
> http://www.ptreyes.org/activities/marconi-rca-wireless-stations
>
> If that station were built today, it would likely use UHF or VHF radio or
> the internet to link the two sites. But that would not make it an internet
> system, or a UHF system, or a telephone system. It's STILL an MF and HF
> radio system.
>
> Yet another example. W7RH, who lives in Las Vegas, built his station about
> ten years ago at a remote site in the Arizona desert, which he mostly
> operates remotely from home. During contests, he operates from the site to
> provide greater operating flexibility. http://w7rh.net/
>
> Building a remote station is no small engineering feat -- it's a LOT more
> complex than opening a box, pulling out a radio that you've bought, and
> hooking it up to an antenna. Remote control is a complex engineering
> problem, and the guys who have built good remote stations have my respect!
>
> Someday, old age or bad health may force us to give up this lovely home in
> the mountains, but I hope that I can continue to operate some station
> remotely. And when I do, I will consider it "real" ham radio.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> On Sat,9/10/2016 6:47 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
>
>> If ever there was a group of operators who should be
>> classified separately, it is remote operators.
>>
>> Why?  Because the facts are that -
>>
>> 1.  Those operators are at all times communicating over the
>>     internet.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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