[UK-CONTEST] Remote Control

[tom wylie]

I think I am with Paul on this one.   The USA is one Country - so a 
station no longer has to identify his call area - eg K6AAA could equally 
be in New York as California and so on.

A Russian UA9 might just be over the Urals or on the birder with UA0.

What is there now (technically) for the Californian guy to have complete 
propagation and yes maybe even two sunrises if he operates his "A" 
station from his home and when he feels like it, operates his "B" 
station remotely from his other - remote - east coast location.

In a contest which uses serial numbers how is anybody to know?

This gives him (or her) an unfair advantage and is tantamount to 
cheating in my book.   IMHO it is certainly outwith the spirit of the 
Contest!

The only benefit I could see in our much smaller country is like if 
Clive (POI)was on holiday and GB7HQ needed his station, it could be 
remoted from the mainland!!

I think the rules of contesting should be reviewed to take this scenario 
into account.  Its difficult enough competing at the moment.

Contesting has got itself into a mess with big stations running 
humungous amounts of power totally un-policeable relying on self 
policing and "honesty"..... as the man says - yea - right!



Tom
GM4FDM



Paul O'Kane wrote:
> Posted under the topic "New CQ WW Category"
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Roger Parsons" <ve3zi at yahoo.com>
>
>   
>>> .. My remote station is 14km from home and I control it
>>> over a 900MHz link - that being an amateur band in
>>> Canada. I hope that most people would accept that as a
>>> legitimate amateur radio operation for contesting or DXing?
>>>       
>
>   
>>> My link uses TCP/IP protocol and there is no technical
>>> reason why the station could not be controlled over a 14km
>>> wire, somebody else's radio, or even the evil internet.
>>> How does that fundamentally change things?
>>>       
>
> and Peter G3LET replied
>
>   
>> Your system just transfers you as the operator from a
>> practical radio location to somewhere you'd prefer to
>> live, never mind the connecting technology, which
>> doesn't provide any additional benefit.   No changes 
>> to the rules for the existing sections have been
>> indicated, so you should be fireproof!
>>     
>
> This issue of remote-control operation isn't quite as
> clear-cut as we might expect.  We all consider ourselves
> to be reasonable people and therefore, by definition,
> nearly everything we do is reasonable.
>
> Roger has a remote station 14km from home, and he considers
> this to be perfectly reasonable because that's what he
> does.  I have had emails from a Californian contester who
> can fire up his Prince Edward Island super-station any
> time he chooses and hand out PEI mults.  He thinks this
> is reasonable because that's what he does.  Not everyone
> will agree.
>
> I believe distance is a red herring - there's something
> fundamentally different about remote control operation.
> Of course, we are all perfectly entitled to do it.  It's
> fun, technically challenging and in some ways even more
> difficult than "conventional" operation.
>
> Here's why I believe remote-control operation is
> different.  It reminds me of standard professional
> broadcasting techniques - the operator is in the
> studio, and the RF bits are somewhere else.
>
> Remote-controlled stations are, in effect, personal
> repeaters.  I have an aversion to working repeaters,
> it doesn't seem quite the same as a "real" QSO and,
> after all, I'm a reasonable person?  Not everyone will
> agree.
>
> Because of almost-universal broadband internet, and
> because manufacturers are starting to integrate remote-
> contol facilities into rigs, an increasing proportion
> of rag-chewers, DXers and contesters will avail of it.
> We will soon have super-stations selling access by the
> hour/day/week. No need to travel to experience pile-ups
> from exotic locations.
>
> It's getting to the stage where regulation is needed.
> I believe the first step, as G3LET suggested for the
> Xtreme contesters, is to have remote-controlled stations
> identify themselves as such.
>
> For more on this topic, please see
> www.ei5di.com/hunting1.html   
> www.ei5di.com/hunting2.html
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>