CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting - now ARRL and Remote

To: Paul Bourque <pbourque@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting - now ARRL and Remote
From: kq2m@kq2m.com
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 09:15:28 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

WOW Paul - what a truly disappointing response!

First, the ARRL, when whomever decided unilaterally to treat remote the same as just using a keyer, they did so without ANY open discussion with the contesting community. It was simply included DE FACTO. No notice, no discussion, NOTHING that I ever saw.

Had remote operating been openly discussed by the ARRL at that time, I would have formally made my objection TO THE ARRL at that time to REMOTE NOT being in it's own separate REMOTE category. REMOTE would have it's own NON-Assisted and Assisted categories of course.

Second, there is a difference between outlawing the use of a technology vs. allowing it as it's own class of technology. I have NEVER been opposed to the use of remote technology to operate, only that it be considered different because it uses NON AMATEUR-RADIO based technology to communicate, which is fundamentally DIFFERENT than NON-REMOTE. I have always felt that Remote should be in it's own category the same way that a distinction is made for ops using high power, which as we know, is in it's
own category because it uses a DIFFERENT and more powerful technology.

As it is, I have objected to not having REMOTE in it's own category FOR MANY YEARS with my explanation as to why, in many contest writeups and emails since that time. AGAIN, I don't object to the use of the technology - I think that advancements in the state of the art of contest operating are more often than not, a GOOD thing, and I used Remote to operate 20 meters at K1LZ in the 2023 ARRLDXCW, but regardless, it is STILL making qso's by NON-Amateur means. If the ARRL wants to allow qso's by using NON-Amateur means then it should openly acknowledge that fact, allow it's use and put Remote in it's own category.

Three, Rules are not like firmament even though some people like to act as though they are. A non-existent rule or badly written rule doesn't become better or more valid with time. Rules can and should be written or rewritten as needed, to codify and/or clarify the situation at hand, and as soon as possible. Indeed the BEST contests have rules that are made/changed AFTER OPEN discussion WITH THE CONTEST PARTICIPANTS and contest community!

Bluetooth is a another form of remote, which should be in the REMOTE category because, like REMOTE, it uses
NON-AMATEUR RADIO means to communicate.

And, NO, remote operation is NOT "like an extended mic cord". That's a rationalization used by people that want REMOTE to be treated the same as NON-REMOTE because they don't want to acknowledge the clear distinction between the two - which is that REMOTE operating REQUIRES the use of NON-AMATEUR RADIO means in order to make and confirm the contest qso's. NON-REMOTE operating does NOT require the use of NON-AMATEUR RADIO technology.

Your example of non-allowance of "email, text message, phone call, carrier pigeon, smoke signal" etc. to confirm signal report or part of the exchange highlights EXACTLY what I am talking about. The ARRL is being INCONSISTENT in allowing the use NON-AMATEUR RADIO MEANS to make qso's (REMOTE) but NOT allowing the use NON-AMATEUR RADIO means to confirm them. That doesn't even make sense!

No rule change is going to fix that unless it is a rule that acknowledges and puts REMOTE or BLUETOOTH within it's own
separate REMOTE category.  And it is NOT too late to do so.


Bob, KQ2M



On 2024-03-15 20:57, Paul Bourque wrote:
Control of the transmitter via remote control is allowed. Remote
operation is just like an extended mic cord. The contact is to be made
from one radio to another radio, regardless of the control method.
Would the contact not be allowed if you used a Bluetooth headset?.
Bluetooth isn’t amateur radio.

Now your’e just nitpicking the rules, really??

What the rule says is that you can’t confirm your signal report or
any part of the exchange via an email, text message, phone call,
carrier pigeon, smoke signal…. See rule OPRG.4 of the Dx Contest
rules

 -Paul

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 9:47 PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:

Hi Paul,

Not to change the subject but, if "All required elements of a
contact must be exchanged via amateur radio.", then how do contacts
made via remote qualify?  Is the internet considered to be Amateur
Radio?

It seems to me that contacts made via remote - which requires the
use of
NON-Amateur Radio technology as a conduit for making those qso's -
should be in a separate category because those NON-Amateur Radio
means
are essential to making those qso's.

Bob, KQ2M

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>