Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule

[Tom W8JI]

> Now, consider this:  We keep talking about remote RX, and the attendant
> problems of getting full SDR data back to the main station where the
> operator is located.  Lets flip this around.  Lets move the operator to 
> the
> receive site, and move the transmitter 100 miles away.  That way, we only
> need low bandwidth - keying data, TX audio, and perhaps TX antenna
> switching.  Does THIS change things at all?
>
> In other words - use the full receiving capabilities of your current
> station, and take away transmitter hash.  Poof!  No longer an issue,
> because the TX is now 100 miles away...
>
> This is a serious game changer in my books, and needs a serious rethink
> before we say "hmmm - OK - old guys need this - no problem - sounds 
> fine..."

People are putting far too much emotion in this. It is a technical issue. 
The technology to do this at one site is not all that difficult.

Get a K3 and a reasonable amplifier, and you have minimal composite noise on 
site. Phase-null the TX antenna out of the RX antenna ahead of any RX 
amplification, and you can get down to noise floor at 1500 watts with 
reasonable spacing.

Even if the transmitter is nulled, the contact advantage is minimal in a 160 
contest. The reason is any good station will run the band nearly dry of 
contacts. You pick up far more contacts with the operator going slow at slow 
times to get slow stations than someone would ever get by duplex.  The 
primary advantage to duplex is in multi-op, where an operator can be 
dedicated to moving up and down the band picking people off. Successful 
multi-ops already have space to duplex, at least to some reasonable extent.

The real advantage to remote or split site is a better noise or antenna 
environment. What we should be debating are the real facts and effects, not 
what we want to be the facts.

As for DXCC, since sometime in the 1990's (as I recall), we could legally 
move anywhere or operate anywhere and collect DXCC. Prior to that, it was 
not unheard of for people to call people on the phone to "help" them get a 
new country. 160 meters for many years had a phone-a-friend list. I recall 
that going on in various forms since the 1970's, at least. Suddenly, it is a 
major problem that will ruin radio as we know it!

The most tragic thing I recall in Ham radio was hearing W8UDN, Ed,  (a 
person I rarely spoke to) actually crying on the radio when he was losing 
his 160 station. Listening to Ed's open distress and sadness at no longer 
being able to enjoy something he loved for most of his life turned a page 
for me.

If letting someone who loves radio operate a radio, however he can manage to 
do it, without unfairly taking away from other's ability to enjoy what they 
want, I'm all for it.

I think anyone who bases their success or value in life by how they rank in 
something as silly as a national DXCC list, or worrying about someone making 
50 more contacts in a contest, deserves all the angst and distress worrying 
about others creates for them.

I hope the people who write rules eventually let people like VO1HP enjoy 
radio, instead of false concerns. Radio is all the better when we help each 
other, instead of holding someone like Ed back.


73 Tom