CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] ] Incorrect conclusions about un-assisted versusassisted

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] ] Incorrect conclusions about un-assisted versusassisted
From: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:18:23 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Is it the position that to be competitive as a single operator, and to keep
up with technology in amateur radio, one has to have to access to packet or
the Internet?
At my place in Hawaii (NH7A), I did not access to packet or the Internet (no
telephone line, much less ADSL).
Similarly, in Senegal (6W1RY) there is no packet and the Internet access is
spotty at best.
Even at my QTH in the countryside of France (F5VHJ), I do not have packet
and the Internet is spotty. I was lucky with ADSL, my neighbor cannot get
ADSL to his house.
Getting information about other stations from other operators to a single
operator is simply being assisted. No problem with the category for those
that want to compete in that class.
Why should those that do not have access to the Internet, absent getting a
satellite hookup, be now classified  into the assisted class when in fact
they are not.
Lastly, SO2R is no different then a single operator having two antennas on
the same band and being able to receive and transmit in different
directions. It is still one operator doing it all with just one signal.
73, Al



_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>