Topband: The Remote question

[Bill Cromwell]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for your comments. I may seem like a true heretic being on this 
list. I'm not a *real* contester and even less a *real* DXer. I do have 
QSOs with DX stations on several bands. But I don't reject QSOs with 
U.S. or Canadian stations (Canada is only a small handful of miles from 
here). I have looked at the "two" sides of this same issue and I can see 
both sides, too. I also observed a scarcity of smoke and flames. That is 
appreciated here, too.

About heresy (or not). I no longer have the resources - including the 
space - to install the large antennas required for DX contesting or 
challenges. At this point in my life I am *not* going to have those 
resources. So I use 160 meters more casually. In fact, I'm having 
technical difficulty with the radios but I'll work my way through that. 
So maybe being on a list named "TopBand" is not really heresy. The other 
part of the list name involves the host - "Contesting.com". I have the 
same 'casual' approach to contesting. For me it is more of 
"participating in on-air events. On Top Band my 'contest' would be the 
Stew Perry. Or maybe some of the QSO parties and "sprints" with activity 
on Top Band.

It's all good. I'll see you on the air.

73,

Bill  KU8H



On 07/12/2015 09:32 AM, nn4t at comcast.net wrote:
> Good morning. I have followed with interest the discussion on this subject. I enjoyed hearing both sides of the issue from my fellow DXers. Most of the replies have been both thoughtful and respectful and I thank you for that.
> I thought you may find it interesting to hear a comment from the perspective of an RHR user. Perhaps some of the others who comment also used that service (which seems to have triggered this debate) but I don't remember seeing that. I have been an RHR customer for two years. I have been a DXer for the entire 42 years of my amateur career. Climbing the DX Challenge ladder is my principal goal. I have a home station focused on 6, 80 and 160. 93.5% of the entities I need for the Challenge are on these three bands. I have a full sized quarter wave vertical for 160 (and 8 560 ' beverages), a 4 square for 80 and a 9 element M2 at 80' for 6. The station works well and has been productive. But as you know from 160 propagation is finicky. And for those who have not spent time on 6, it is even more so there. I rent the RHR stations because they give me more opportunities to work new ones for the Challenge. It is simply another tool I use to accomplish my goal. And unless the DXCC rules
>    change I will continue to do so. I appreciate, and respect, those who feel this somehow violates the spirit of the DXCC program. I simply do not agree.
> Ham radio has always had a prickly relationship with technology. On one hand we love the cool gadgets and the hobby would die without them. On the other, it forces us to deal with change. Anyone remember the debate about using packet clusters to work DX? "Shooting fish in a barrel" was a common criticism of those who used that technology. Remember when there was a move to ban from DXCC credit qsos made on a list?
> I suspect remote technology is here to stay; the ARRL BOD has already spoken once on that matter and were quite clear. What I would suggest is view this technology as simply a tool; available to all willing to pay the fee (just like our expensive radios, antennas, amps, etc.) . Use it or don't use it. The choice is yours. Best, Steve, NN4T
> _________________
>