there would be one other limiting factor to be considered. and that would be
the rules of the countries where the transmitters (and maybe even receivers?)
actually are. how would you license your remote in sri lanka? and what
callsign would you use? i think it sounds like an interesting idea and sure
opens lots of areas for technical advancement, but its also going to open lots
of international licensing questions. i would kind of like to be able to have
operators sit at home and operate my station via remote control, sure would save
on their travel (especially with big storm coming tomorrow)... and i wouldn't
have to feed them all. and even having remote receivers would be a big help
working those europeans with attic dipoles on 80m. and it sure would be nice to
switch to the west coast site to run ja's on 10m when it closes from new
england. lots of questions.
Kelly Taylor wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> What a fascinating idea. It would certainly be interesting to see what
> transpired. And since there would be no comparisons with other classes
> possible (and likely a small percentage of entrants in each), probably even
> comparisons within this class would be impossible, I see this having no
> adverse effect on other classes.
>
> It would have an ancillary effect, however. I mean, it's pretty darn unlikely
> that a VU2 will ever get to pick up the VE4 mult on 75 meters. But give me an
> Internet-connected remote station in Sri Lanka... Still, I don't think that's
> a major concern, given that every VU2 will have the same opportunity to work
> my Sri Lanka remote as any other VU2.
>
> The interesting thing here, though, would not be the scores: far more
> fascinating would be the technological tales explaining what was used, how
> and what effect it had on operations. I think you could fill 20 pages of CQ
> with these kinds of tales. I'd read every word.
>
> I can also see this class, used to its fullest, as offering unique insight
> into the current rules: pointing out which ones work, which ones don't and
> which ones are just plain unnecessary. Anything that can add some brevity to
> rules has got to be a good thing.
>
> How would you identify? VE4XT/VQ2/ON4/5H3/PY1? What a mouthful! And on CW!
>
> 73, kelly
> ve4xt
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
--
David Robbins K1TTT (ex KY1H)
k1ttt@berkshire.net or robbins@berkshire.net
http://www.berkshire.net/~robbins/k1ttt.html
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|