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


W0MU
 

If it is not a competition and an individual award then leave it alone.  Allow people to work the DX as they see fit anywhere within that DXCC entity. 

If a person can fly across the country or drive across town to use another station or have multiple homes and stations to work DX which has been allowed for a long time then there is no reason to disqualify REMOTES, unless of course you have a grudge against the owners.  There a number of other entities running remotes.  This is a part of the hobby that is growing quickly. 

50 miles can be the difference of being in the  E skip zone or out on 6m.  Who cares. 

You do you and I will do me. 

My DXCC is my award done my way.  It is of no concern to anyone else how I achieved it other than it was done within the rules. 

How does anyone expect the ARRL to put the remote contacts back in the can that was already opened and why should they? The ARRL SELL awards.  Why would they want to limit who they can sell to?

We already know that plenty of people run excessive power especially on 30m in the USA, we know that people already use remote receivers to make contacts.  We know that whatever the rules are, if they are unenforceable, people with do it because people are people and not everyone has the same morals or integrity.  Shame on them, but what they do does not effect me working DXCC, Honor roll or the challenge.  

It seems like the same old witch hunters that went after Ray for his Steaming are still looking to burn witches here at the DXCC.  That is a very sad state of the hobby.  Are they unhappy because they were late to the Remote party and missed out?  Do these people really have the best interest of the hobby in mind or their own interests?  It seems clear to me who they serve.

W0MU


On 8/7/2020 10:53 AM, w2ttt wrote:

John, K7KB,
I agree that it could be extended, but on 6m and higher bands, there can be a profound and consistent  difference in propagation between 124 and 500 miles.

When I did propagation-based interference studies on copper-based services such as ADSL and VDSL2, we noted that there was a large area of common propagation exoerienced across the geography over a relatively short period of time for twisted pair cable plant with similar levels and types of defects.

As one gets to 6m, geographic diversity starts to create pockets of good propagation that don't always carry to other areas.  This can be due to a variety of conditions in both the ionosphere and the troposphere.  Living on a coast can be very different for tropo than living 100 miles inland for example.  500 miles north of New Jersey I can be comfortably into an auroral zone that just doesn't happen here.

For HF, it would be fine to extend the circle to 1000km, but for 6m and up, I think that 200km is fine.

73,
Gordon Beattie, W2TTT
201.314.6964




On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 9:58 AM -0400, "John K7KB" <k7kb.dx@...> wrote:

For one thing, I think the 200KM limit is way too restrictive. Do you really think there is that much propagation advantage from a station located 200KM (124 miles) from my location vs 500 miles (804KM)? No, I don't think so.

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