The station on Mars would *have to be a repeater* as there is no
infrastructure between Mars and the other operator either. Until
inter-planetary fiber is run, it would have to be a repeater.
Your Bluetooth scenario is precisely correct - it is not a repeater.
> Using the same logic, if I had a Bluetooth headset/microphone (frequencies
> restricted to keep it within the 2.4 gHz ham band), then that too would be
> a repeater station? I disagree -- the link between the control point and
> the radio is part of the same station. Now, if I contacted someone via a
> Mars rover, as far as I am concerned, I contacted a radio on Mars. Does it
> count for awards/contest? That is up to the sponsor. If they allow it --
> it
> counts. Same with any remote control -- if allowed, it counts, if not, it
> doesn't. --Mike, WV2ZOW
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:11 PM, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>
>> In this case, it would be a 'repeater'; invalid for contest purposes and
>> most others.
>>
>> W5OV
>>
>> > Remote Operating
>> >
>> > As I said before: "the technology exists today to place a station
>> capable
>> > of remote operation on each and every DXCC entity in the world."
>> >
>> > But it actually goes beyond that. We put a â??roverâ? on Mars (the
>> > planet) right? Two I believe.
>> >
>> > If my web search is correct, the Mars rover(s) operates in or around
>> > X-band, and there just happens to be an amateur radio allocation in
>> the
>> > X-band at 10-10.5GHz. Looks like dropping the frequency from about
>> 10.7GHz
>> > to 10.5GHz ought to do it. It is probably not quite this simple, but
>> bear
>> > with me here.
>> >
>> > Are there 2 NASA scientist hams out there willing to reconfigure the
>> > rovers a bit so that they can complete the first interplanetary
>> amateur
>> > radio QSO?
>> >
>> > But who do we say was the operator on Mars ? I mean, which one worked
>> Mars
>> > first?
>> > If an operator does not have to be at the remote station, then it
>> counts
>> > right?
>> > All you have to do is get the equipment there.
>> >
>> > Would you claim the first interplanetary QSO, if no one was at the
>> other
>> > end?
>> >
>> > Now, I am not saying remote operation is good or bad, but at what
>> point
>> > does it count or not count?
>> >
>> > If you remote across borders, donâ??t you need at a minimum the proper
>> > license to do that?
>> > And also know that the country you remote to, allows remote operation
>> not
>> > just from another country but possibly by a non-citizen?
>> >
>> > New rule proposal: for all remote contest operations, have the
>> operator
>> > submit evidence of proper licensing, similar as is done for DXCC
>> approved
>> > operations, you have to prove you had permission to operate a station
>> from
>> > the location/country you remote to. And also prove that you really
>> > operated a remote station located where you claim it is located.
>> >
>> > 73 Scott W2LC
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > CQ-Contest mailing list
>> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|