Re: Proposed Changes to DXCC for Remote Stations - Charge to DXAC


W0MU
 

Good question!  Maybe the ARRL could comment on why they turned it into a competition by publishing results.  If there we more dxing and less competing maybe we would not DX entities such as BS7 (known throughout the dxing world as Bull#$#$ rocks) etc.

Just a thought.

W0MU


On 8/5/2020 12:48 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

If “DXCC is not (supposed to be) a competition”, why does the ARRL publish standings?

<
http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-standings>

 

I’ve never attended a major DX club meeting that didn’t begin with a “sit down”, in which the person with the most DXCC entities confirmed is left standing at the end.

 

The Northern California DX Club, which motivated me to earn DXCC so that I could join back in 1990, publishes a monthly “ladder” showing the DXCC totals of its members, from largest to smallest.

 

The competition is (mostly) friendly, with more experienced DXers providing advice and coaching to newer DXers, and spotting rare DX that their competitors may need.

 

Not everyone is a competitive DXer; every DXer sets his or her own objectives, free of criticism from anyone else. But many DXers are competitive, including me.

 

          73,

 

               Dave, AA6YQ

 

 

From: ARRL-Awards@... [mailto:ARRL-Awards@...] On Behalf Of Abrams, Saul (DHSES) via groups.arrl.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2020 2:31 PM
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Proposed Changes to DXCC for Remote Stations - Charge to DXAC

 

Let me begin by saying that the DXCC rules for operators must be consistent for all operations.  If I can fly to Maine or California to work DX or a DXpedition  generally unavailable from my home, and the contacts count for DXCC, then there is no logical reason why working them from home via remote should count any less.  Neither contact is being made by a radio at my home.  We may not like that some people can remote to work DX, but they could just as easily have flown to those stations to operate.  The only difference is time and money.  So, unless we are willing to revert back to the pre-1986 rule about working all  DX from within a fixed distance from our homes under all circumstances, then there is no basis for a rule treating remotes any differently. 

 

Next, I think the 2017 Report of the DXAC says something different than that summarized by N4MB. (The link to the 2014 Report only brings up the ARRL logo.)

The 2017 Report says:

 

“In summary

1.) There was no strong consensus to change Rule 11

2.) There was a surprising lack of enthusiasm on the part of DXAC to deal with this tasking.

3.) There was a general unhappiness with the whole remote issue as it deals with DXCC, but the feeling that the decision had already been made and unless that decision was re-considered in its entirety, there was little that could be recommended to improve potential problems.”

 

“[R]e-considered in its entirety,” in my opinion, would also have to reconsider the 1986 change allowing country-wide DXCC operation.  While the 2014 Report quoted below recommended some mileage limitation, the PSC did not adopt it and the later 2017 Report did not recommend it again. 

 

Finally, I don’t think we want to go down the path mentioned below that  “This [remote operation] has deprecated the need for operators to learn to take advantage of propagation or to build and improve stations; “Propagation shopping” allows operators to simply click to find the “loudest signal” thus not developing skills for communication.”  We should not be making value judgments about necessary skills and basing recommendations on those judgments, because other, recently popular modes of operation require very little “skill for communication.” Do you really want to go there?

 

As many have said before, DXCC is not (supposed to be) a competition.  It is a reflection of ones own accomplishments.  What someone else does, does not diminish what I have done. 

73, Saul  K2XA

 

Saul M. Abrams, J.D.

Disaster Assistance Representative

 

Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Services

1220 Washington Avenue, Building 7A, 4th Floor, Albany, NY  12242

(518) 417-6029 | Cell (518) 810-7171 | FAX (518) 322-4984

saul.abrams@...

www.dhses.ny.gov

 

From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Mickey Baker N4MB via groups.arrl.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 3:49 PM
To: ARRL-Awards@...
Subject: [ARRL-Awards] Proposed Changes to DXCC for Remote Stations - Charge to DXAC

 

ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.

Please note that these are proposed changes, posted here for polite pubic comment. 
This has gone to the DX Advisory Committee Chairman and the DXAC is charged with review.

At the end of the text below, you will find links to the complete DXAC reports that recommend much more severe policies that the ones contained herein.

Please remember that the DXCC award is one of the oldest and most prestigious awards in amateur radio and let's have dialogue that is respectful of each other and the history of this award.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule Change Proposal for Using Remote Stations for DXCC Credit

 

History

The DX Advisory Committee (DXAC) examined the utilization of remote station operation for DXCC credit and recommended in their report on July, 2014:

 

"The DXAC favored the proposed change of rule I.9, stating, however, some distance limitation should be included for the remote station. Using an idea similar to that used for contest stations, establishing a distance of 200km separation between the remote station and the operator’s home station location and that no part of a remote station can be located more than 200km from any other part.[i]

 

The DX Advisory Committee was charged in 2017 to reexamine the issues around remote-controlled operations and had a very poignant and emphatic answer:

 

Part of the charge read, Please consider potential ethical issues with regard to legal, remote-controlled operations, and how these operations comport with DXCC rules. Then, please consider DXCC Rule 11.” The remainder of the charge was detailed and extensive.[ii]

 

The reply included the following from the DXAC:

“…the DXAC was being asked to consider an ethics statement that it had previously suggested not be accepted, and dealt with an issue (unlimited use of remote radio stations) to make contacts which would be used for DXCC credit that the DXAC had recommended against.

 

Both complete reports from the DXAC are available. Links to both documents are below.

 

The ARRL Programs and Services Committee nor did the full Board take action based on these recommendations, three years apart, nor since;

 

Many active and successful DX Operators who have been long time supporters of the ARRL have complained that the current rule, Section 1, Rule 9, allows stations to “shop propagation” from moment to moment using services that rent or otherwise share a number of remotely controlled stations geographically diverse stations located throughout the same DX Entity;

 

While the League wishes to encourage the use of remote stations, “propagation shopping” has resulted in many amateurs with smaller stations to be overpowered and displaced by the use of remote “super stations.” This has deprecated the need for operators to learn to take advantage of propagation or to build and improve stations; “Propagation shopping” allows operators to simply click to find the “loudest signal” thus not developing skills for communication. For the DXCC Honor Roll achievement to be equitable, this practice should be discouraged, so that this achievement is more of a reflection of the art of DX’ing;

 

ARRL recognizes the need for amateurs to use their own stations, whether at their primary residence or a remote residence, or to use a third party station for DXCC if it is impossible to build out a station at their home.

 

We propose this change in the DXCC rules which are fair to those who have made contacts to date, easy to understand and with which to comply, and limits “propagation shopping” for DXCC award credit going forward;

 

Program and Services Committee, after receiving considerable input worldwide with the specified recommendations from the DX Advisory Committee, propose the following DXCC rule change to the ARRL Board of Directors for approval to change Section I, Rules 9 and 11 as follows:

 

Amend Section I, Rule 9, of the DXCC Rules which currently reads,

 “a) All stations used to make contacts for a specific DXCC award must be located within the same DXCC entity.”

 

To:

a) All station transmitters and receivers used to make contacts for a specific DXCC award on or after the date of adoption of this rule must be located within the same DXCC entity, with additional restrictions regarding remote operation.  Any and all remote contacts submitted for DXCC must be conducted with the transmitters and receivers:

1.     Within a circle with a radius of 200km from the applicant’s permanent address as shown on their license. If the license does not specify a geographic address, the radius center will be the post office serving the applicant. This provides for remote operation of an applicant’s primary station from anywhere, or an additional station within the circle, OR;

2.     Within a circle with a radius of 200km from the applicant’s location at the time of the contact. This provision provides for the travelling amateur, who often carries and establishes a temporary station, and the remote use of that station within 200km of the applicant’s location at the time of the contact, OR;

3.     A single additional geographic location specified by the applicant. This additional geographic location may be changed only once per consecutive year – once established by making a contact from a location only that location may be submitted for credit for one contiguous calendar year. An example would be the applicant may choose their own vacation home station operated remotely, or a single commercial remote superstation that is beyond the 200km from their home location. Multiple additional remote locations are not permitted to discourage “propagation shopping.”

 

All claimed DXCC Contacts Until the date of adoption of this rule, will be honored as per the prior rule in effect.

 

Amend Section I, Rule 11, of the DXCC Rules which currently reads:

11.  Issues concerning remotely controlled operating and DXCC are best dealt with by each individual carefully considering the ethical limits that he/she will accept for his/her DXCC and other operating awards.  As the premier operating award in Amateur Radio, DXCC draws intense scrutiny from its participants.  As DX chasers climb up the Standings there will be increased attention given to these achievements and the owner of these achievements needs to be comfortable standing behind his/her award and numbers.  Peer attention has always been a part of awards chasing, of course, but in these times with so many awards and so many players it is more important than ever to 'play the game' ethically.

 

Technological advances, while welcome, also add to the difficulty in defining rules for DXCC, but the intent of the rules is what is important.  It is never OK to remotely use a station outside of the 'home DXCC entity' to add to the home-entity DXCC totals -- just as it is never OK for you to ask someone else at another station in another place to make QSOs for you.  Remotely controlled stations must be properly licensed if they are to count for DXCC.  It will continue to be up to the operator to decide what types of legal remote control operating he/she will use (if any) to contribute to an operating award.

 

To the following:

11.  Issues concerning remotely controlled operating and DXCC are best dealt with by each individual carefully considering the limits defined by the DXCC and other operating awards.  As the premier operating award in Amateur Radio, DXCC draws intense scrutiny from its participants.  As DX chasers climb up the Standings there will be increased attention given to these achievements and the owner of these achievements needs to be comfortable standing behind his/her award and numbers.  Peer attention has always been a part of awards chasing, of course, but in these times with so many awards and so many players it is more important than ever to 'play the game' ethically.

 

Technological advances, while welcome, also add to the difficulty in defining rules for DXCC, but the intent of the rules is what is important.  It is never OK to remotely use a station outside of the 'home DXCC entity' to add to the home-entity DXCC totals -- just as it is never OK for you to ask someone else at another station in another place to make QSOs for you.  Remotely controlled stations must be properly licensed if they are to count for DXCC.  It will continue to be up to the operator to decide what types of legal remote control operating he/she will use (if any) to contribute to an operating award.

 


--
73, Saul  K2XA


Join ARRL-Awards@groups.arrl.org to automatically receive all group messages.