eHam Logo

 Home Home
 Articles & Stories
 Contesting Wiki
 My Profile

 This Week's Contests
 Classified Ads
 Contest Links
 Product Reviews

Contest Lists

Other Lists

 Mailing List FAQs

Site Information
 About This Site Team

Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

Recently the RDXC committee reclassified P3F to high power from low power without publicly providing strong evidence that any infraction had occurred. They concluded was that the contestant was running HP on 80/40m but not full-time, just 10 minutes here and there without any convincing evidence. It appears they used the RBN as their source of information. Should the RXDC contest have to publicly provide convincing evidence before reclassifying a station from LP to HP?

Recent Surveys

Randy, K5ZD, wrote a sidebar titled " Convergence and Change" in the 2015 CQWW CW printed results in CQ magazine. He wrote that the "convergence of personal computers, Internet access, DX clusters, and CW Skimmer have changed the nature of CW contesting". He goes to say that it is "more difficult to police the line between the single operator working alone and those who are using the assistance of DX spotting." In light of this convergence and change is it time to recombine SO and SOA into a single category?

What's your primary Software for HF Contests ? ( no VHF/UHF ! )

Are you ready the this year's winter contest season

What ways have you found to be effective to attract newcomers to our hobby?

What is your linear?

View All Survey Questions

Have a good idea for a Contesting Online Survey question?
Enter your idea!

Do you believe that "remote control" of a station should be valid in the SO Unassisted Category of contests?
  Posted: Oct 01, 2007   (186 votes, 15 comments) by N1UR

  Yes, as long as the remote station itself conforms to the rules
  Yes, but only if also in the same DXCC entity or state (for Domestic Contests)
  No, not as SO Unassisted
  No, under any circumstances
  Don't know
  Don't care
    (186 votes, 15 comments)
Survey Results
Yes, as long as the remote station itself conforms to the rules 39% (73)
Yes, but only if also in the same DXCC entity or state (for Domestic Contests) 16% (29)
No, not as SO Unassisted 14% (26)
No, under any circumstances 26% (49)
Don't know 2% (3)
Don't care 3% (6)

Survey Comments
I meant to post my comment Subject: Global Concept, under the Do You Favor A Single Standardized Club Circle... survey forum!

Posted by NT4XT on September 28, 2007

Global Concept?
How about by Continent. So much organizing is via the Internet anyway, perhaps Continental boundaries, or by Country, eg any Canadian can participate in any Canadian contest as a member of a designated Canadian club for any particular contest.
Or US, or VE/K/XE, etc. This might blend people together instead of having regional competition. It would still be group competition. Or make it so that the radius of the circle stands, it can be moved 1x per year, and you may include X number of wild card stations from anywhere (say 2 or 3, pick a number), anywhere in the country per contest. It would make a club seek stations on the West Coast, and East Coast, etc. Club participation would become a function that could include loose affiliation for the sake of propagation advantages of stations on two different coasts. Recruitment into clubs would be on a contest by contest basis. An active contester might find themselves in the NCCC for one event, the SECC in another, for example, FCG, SMWC, YCCC, Order of the Boiled Egg Heads, or what have you.
This might also get rid of whatever administrative encumberances arise when it's time to fight over the origin of the circle, it's radius, and all that. Squabbles about who got left out and who needed to be left in, etc could be a thing of the past. Distant recruitment based on strategic and tactical advantage would come into play.

Just thinking out loud for the heck of it, here and trying to think outside the circle, so to speak. LOL.

Above all, have fun in the contest. 73.

PS, and as old friends move far outside the circle, joining other local circles, they may find themselves working for and with, old friends once again on occasion. Maybe it's a crazy idea but I hope it's a fresh one.

Posted by NT4XT on September 28, 2007

Increases the Barrier to Entry
I am trying to build a moderately competitive suburban SO LP station. This is already a substantial financial challenge.

Allowing remote operating would substantially increase the cost of being "moderately competitive". Now I would have to purchase a remote site, all the necessary hardware, broadband internet access at both sites, etc - which I can't afford. Just to stand a chance against an operator who could afford remote operation in a geographically advantageous location.

Some commentators have said that remore operation is not easy and so does not give an advantage. That may be true at present. However very soon the bandwidth and technology will be available to make remote operation identical to local operation, so having your antennas on top of a mountain or on a small island will give you a substantial competitive advantage.

For this reason, I would prefer that remote operation not be permitted in at least the "entry-level" classes like SO LP unassisted. However I am quite happy that SO Assisted allow remote operation, for the benefit of those who can't put up local antennas etc.

Posted by zs6aaa on September 28, 2007

remote control
I think it is time to establish a new category for remote stations. Until then, as long as the station complies with the criteria of a regular station at the physical location of the transmitting and receiving equipment the actual location of the operator is immaterial.

Posted by n7df on September 24, 2007

remote you've built a station somewhere other than your home. You fly in to operate a contest using the radios and hardware you've assembled at the site. The next contest, rather than fly in, you access the station control and operate the contest using the radios and hardware you've assembled at the site. What is the difference? You are using the same radios and hardware.

Mike K9NW

Posted by K9NW on September 23, 2007

It still blows my mind why remoting is a big problem to some. As long as the entire station is within the 500m circle and follows all the rules for a particular contest, whats the difference? There is none.

The argument that its not real amateur radio is nuts. The actual point to point communication is via rf. IZ2EJU does not like the long microphone cable analogy. Well thats all it is nothing more, nothing less, a long mic cable. The mic cable at your station happens to be a few feet/meters long. Mine happens to be a few miles/km long.

Personally I operate remote out of necessity. I live in an antenna restricted community, for now. As soon as I get moved, which will hopefully be soon, I will pull the remote plug. Trust me remote contesting is not easy.

Rich - N5ZC

Posted by N5ZC on September 22, 2007

Remote control
I live in Dubai but would love to operate my 5X1Z station remotely in the contest from here as I cant get away long enough to go there all the time. While still complying with the rules of the 500meter distance for the staiton. Yes I could operate as A61 but it is not the same!!

Then I could still hand out the double multiplier...


Using the remote setup to counteract the problems faced by multi multis or to gain advantage over other stations by having multiple listening stations around a country I dont agree with.. Overcoming those problems is part of the game and that drives the technical developments forward!

Posted by SM8Z on September 18, 2007

Mileage Limitations
I believe their should be milage limitations to these remotes. Like say 25 radius of home QTH or something which is a fair distance. But I wouldn't want someone in Ohio to be able to operate REMOTE using say another station in Kansas or Oversea's etc. Remember these remotes are operated VIA the internet and they can literally operate any REMOTE setup from anywhere in the world to anywhere in the world I don't really tend to agree with any but as long as some limitations are put in place and safe guards it could be considered.

Rob - K0RU

Posted by K0RU on September 17, 2007

Remote - the future
With more antenna retcitions, smaller lots, hams living in apartments; remote operation will be the future of many ham's stations. While for a big contest a Ham may want to go to the remote site; for a less serious effort the ham may just want to operate remotely. His contact will count in every other stations log, so he should be able to submit a log as well.

Posted by AA4ZZ on September 11, 2007

Remote control
I belife it will be the only option for many hams that life in a urban location. It is more and more difficult to rase up a station for EMC reasons or for restriction of any other matter. Having fun in a contest with a remote controled station might me a nice option to keep HAMs in the hobby...

Posted by DL1EJA on September 7, 2007

Remote control
Why not.

However, I believe the same country/state rule should apply, for regional uniformity reasons.

Posted by kc5r on September 4, 2007

It's not assisted. . .
If what folks are objecting to is that the op's category should not be "unassisted" with a setup like this, I don't agree. It's still unassisted.

If you don't agree with using remote stations, then that would apply to any op, no matter the category he/she were in.

Posted by N0OCT on September 3, 2007

Remote Control
I agree with Ed, N1UR. As long as the remote station conforms to all the rules, same as any other SO Unassisted, no problem.

Posted by w0uo on September 1, 2007

What are the rules?
In my mind, it means that the "remote TX/RX station" must conform to all of the rules which means 500M circle and no separate RX antennas outside of it or use of spotting assistance. If all of these are conformed to by the remote "node", and the control operator solely controls radios and equipment at the node, it is SO Unassisted to me.

None of the "2 receiving" locations discussion comply to this definition.

To me, the further away the control op is from the station, the harder it is. If someone wants to "fire up" EA9EA or something from S51, knock yourself out and may the best op win.


Posted by N1UR on September 1, 2007

Remote control
Even if the remoted controlled station itself conforms to the rules (i.e. TRX connectd to antenna etc) I think that this is not in the spirit of the rules, that were written long before the Internet age. Someone says that remote control is like having a very long mic cable, but Ithink that such view of the problem is not correct.
Happy contesting to all, Rik IZ2EJU

Posted by iz2eju on September 1, 2007

To post a comment, you must be logged in.

If you are not a member, become one now!