Motor sports... Campaigning a Formula race car is certainly a rich mans
sport so there are go-carts at varying degrees of $ for enthusiasts with
finite budgets. Small budget? Go QRP or QRPP and let ingenuity,
perseverance, and diligence make you one of the best of the breed. Weight
lifting or boxing...Participants try to be the best in their class not the
best in the world against all comers. It isnb t realistic and crying won't
fix it.
Get over the fact that there will always be someone with more $ to buy a
better station than you and techs to maintain it. Fair? What in life is
truly fair? I didn't get to pick my ancestors... boo hoo. Why wasn't I born
into a fabulously wealthy family?
Do the best you can with what you can get and try to enjoy the trip. This is
a hobby, not a life and death struggle. Think you have a good workable
"Formula" for leveling the playing field as regards contests? Put it out,
accept critiques, improve it and keep on campaigning it and maybe it will
have a beneficial impact on the way things are done contest wise. Sitting
in the corner and complaining or making specious arguments of illegality of
rental stations is non productive.
Patrick AF5CK
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly Johnson
Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 3:40 PM
To: Patrick Greenlee
Cc: Gene Smar ; TowerTalk ; K8RI ; Mike
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Remote Ham Radio
IMO, contesting is already "unfair". Geographic location is a key to high
scores, as is the topography around the station, the size and height of the
antennas, the quality of the radios, and the power of the amplifiers.
Human ability is also important, but winning requires more than just human
operating skill. Getting on the DXCC honor roll is sure a whole lot easier
with a good geographic location and station, but the biggest key to the
honor role seems to be longevity. It can take decades for those rare DX
locations to be put on the air.
WRTC seems to be the closest thing to a "fair" contest and even that has
station location variables.
It costs an awful lot of money (and usually a very willing wife) to buy a
good station location and build a good station or to fly to one for the
major contests. It's already a bit of a "rich man's game". Isn't that
true of nearly everything? Most sports are "rich man's sports". So is
politics and the stock market.
I agree with Jim Brown when he says that his goal is to improve on his
previous efforts. I do the same. Comparing my efforts on the West Coast
of USA, running a 3 el. Steppir at 55 feet to someone running a
super-station on the East Coast with stacked arrays on a hilltop is
pointless.
I'd gladly pay for access to a remote station if I could afford it. It
requires no less skill than to fly to a super-station for a major contest.
I fail to see the difference between operating the station remotely and
flying there to operate.
Unfortunately, one of these days I may be in a situation where remote
operation is my only option. Our next home move may very well be into an
antenna restricted sub-division. As much as I love having an antenna, I'm
definitely getting pretty tired of restricting myself to old houses built
prior to 1970.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Patrick Greenlee
<patrick_g@windstream.net>wrote:
While I'm not going to rent a station, I fail to see how the FCC rules are
broken. Consider if you went to "RENT-ALL" and rented the components,
transceiver, tower, and antenna. Whether or not the rental clerk, his
boss,
or the owner or stockholders are lisc hams is immaterial as they aren't
doing any transmitting. So long as the equipment is operated within the
rules no harm no foul.
Irrespective of the commercial nature of the equipment rental/lease, the
operator is responsible for the transmissions being IAW FCC rules and
regs.
When you buy equipment that is a monetary transaction. How is that
different from renting/leasing. How is this materially different from a
club station where users pool finances and put up "super stations?"
This is like motocross. Try to campaign a bike on your own and whimper
about the guys with corporate sponsors.
What about if Icom and other corporate sponsors loaned or gave all the
equipment to outfit a DXpedition, then what? Same deal but for a contest
station. Where would you draw the line? Could operators mention they
were
getting their equipment for free from the nice sponsor folk? We all brag
about our specific favorite equipment, right? What if it was to "pay back"
the sponsor for the loan/gift used at the contest station or DXpedition?
I fail to see where these super stations for hire violate any FCC rules or
regs. I also fail to see any morality issues either. I also fail to be
personally attracted to the idea of being a customer. I think this is a
new, clever advance in creative hamming and deserves some new clever
contest rules to level the playing field and or to cause the creation of
WAC and WAS awards etc. endorsed for personal stations, club stations,
"for
hire" stations as well as QRP and QRO stations. I'd be the first to admit
that a phased array of multiple huge antennas on multiple sky scraping
towers is unfair competition for ther 100 or the 1 watt station with a
salty noodle for an antenna.
Andy Granatelli nearly won the Indianapolis 500 with a turbine powered
car. Immediately the playing field was leveled to prevent turbine powered
"rule beaters" from dominating the track. Similar could be done in this
ham radio instance.
Patrick AF5CK
-----Original Message----- From: Gene Smar
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 7:19 PM
To: Mike ; 'K8RI' ; towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Remote Ham Radio
TT:
When a local posting on this showed up here a few months ago, I
protested that this service can't be legal. See below, especially
97.113(a)(2) and (3):
"Sec. 97.113 Prohibited transmissions
------------------------------**------------------------------**
--------------------
"(a) No amateur station shall transmit:
"(1) Communications specifically prohibited elsewhere in this part;
"(2) Communications for hire or for material compensation, direct or
indirect, paid or promised, except as otherwise provided in these rules;
"(3) Communications in which the station licensee or control operator has
a
pecuniary interest, including communications on behalf of an employer,
with
the following exceptions: ...."
The exceptions are concerned with for-sale adverts on the air if this
isn't the operator's line of work and a few others.
IMHO, the station licensee leasing time on his super station for this
purpose is in violation of this Section of the Rules. But that's just me.
73 de
Gene Smar AD3F
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" <noddy1211@comcast.net>
To: "'K8RI'" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>; <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Remote Ham Radio
Nope this is the USA monetary gain Trumps ethics:-)
Seriously I think that rule applies to advertising.
Mike/K6BR
-----Original Message-----
From: TowerTalk
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@**contesting.com<towertalk-bounces@contesting.com>]
On Behalf Of K8RI
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 4:22 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Remote Ham Radio
On 8/2/2013 3:39 PM, Jim W7RY wrote:
At very impressive (high) prices!
73
Jim W7RY
Isn't it against the rules to make money or receive reimbursement for the
use of an Amateur Radio station?
73
Roger (K8RI)
-----Original Message----- From: K7LXC@aol.com Sent: Friday, August
02,
2013 9:39 AM To: towertalk@contesting.com Subject: [TowerTalk] Remote
Ham Radio Greetings, TowerTalkians --
I'm not sure how I missed it but here is a new service for hams.
It's a time-share of ham radio stations of some clout. Check it out
at http://www.remotehamradio.com/**.
Some impressive stations are available for your use.
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3209/6544 - Release Date: 08/01/13
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
______________________________**_________________
______________________________**_________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/towertalk<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|