In the ARRL Contest Update for April 11, 2012 we read Radio Arcala team member Toni OH2UA was at the controls of CQ8X for a serious contest operation in the Azores for WPX SSB. That's not unusual. Wh
I disagree. Any QSO with CQ8X is a perfectly valid QSO with a station in the Azores. That's where the RF was transmitted and received from. The location of the operator is totally irrelevant (as long
It will come as no surprise that I disagree entirely with Paul. Every single QSO that Toni made was a legitimate, unsolicited, 100% amateur radio QSO from the Azores. I think Paul is conflating this
You can beat this dead horse forever, Paul. Were the 4,543 stations talking to CQ8X on the internet? I think not. They were using RADIO. Did you work him? You better take him out of your log, lest yo
Hi Paul, (Apologies - I meant to reply to the list initially... oops.) I still disagree. Although there does indeed need to be a wired connection for this to work, I'll repeat my initial response whi
I may be new around to the contesting realm, but I don't see the need to berate anyone who stated an opinion. That being said, I don't think it is wrong to control a radio remotely. Your rig, still h
radio QSO from the Azores. Well, some subtraction should be made, as OH2UA stated in his 3830-report (http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/3830/2012-April/249492.html) that those QSOs do not count f
I don't think so. I think Toni has misinterpreted DXCC rule 9, which reads: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location o
W1VE wrote: You can beat this dead horse forever, Paul. I can't agree more :-) Just finished first hour of CWT from my sister in law home in Jagodina, KN03PX as YU/S56A using TS-480 with homemade 40
Why do they not count for DXCC? 73, Kermit, AB1J In a message dated 4/11/2012 3:24:53 P.M. GMT Standard Time, prickler.schneider@t-online.de writes: Well, some subtraction should be made, as OH2UA st
If you work CQ8X, the QSO is valid for DXCC. CQ8X cannot receive DXCC credit for these QSOs because the remote operator was not located in the same DXCC entity as the transmitter. Paul N8HM _________
Just my two cents. If the rules allow for this option...then by all means use it if you want...if not...then don't. There are enough categories in most contests to satisfy any operating style. My mot
Paul, As long as the station transmitters and receivers and antennae are all contained on the same premise (as specified by the sponsor), who cares how long the mic and speaker cables are? *73, de Ha
That makes sense. The stations working CQ8X have no means nor obligation to control the length of Toni's control cables, so his being remote shouldn't punish them. ___________________________________
I agree with Pete 100 percent. Remote radio is becoming the next big advancement and that is a good thing. It allows people who are handicapped, live in covenant controlled communities, or have other
IMHO, there are three related issues here, all of which have been used on the corpse of the poor deceased horse at one time or another for years. Issue 1: Eligibility of Remote Controlled Station(s)
Legalities aside...I'm sure you're all very aware that there's quite a few contest entries made using remotely controlled stations that are not claimed as such. It happens every weekend and for the m
Pete, Thanks for quoting the pertinent rule. That rule needs to be changed. The "remote operating point must be located within the same DXCC entity" doesn't serve any purpose and this Azores operatio
So according to the rules , remote QSOs are good for CQ, but not for ARRL DX credit. How is a person supposed to know who is remote or not for DXCC purposes? How is the League going to know if a stat
Hans has provided an excellent example of a leading question. Not to worry. The length of the mic and speaker cables is irrelevant, once it exceeds the usual limit (1km diameter) for contest stations