If you are rich and can fly to friends houses at a whim or have many houses more power to you. If you are a working stiff. Tough luck. It has been that way forever. I guess the rich

To add onto my last post, the proposal clearly states: “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

I apologize for the way I said that. However Ria has posted more than 50 times in the last several days but claims that it isn’t directed entirely at remotes which simply isn’t true. The proposal

Jack Roberts KD9OPV -- your comment is entirely inappropriate and unacceptable. Jeff n1kdo

From what I can see, the main objection to remote operation is the propagation advantage one can get from operating from one part of the country vs. the other. But don't forget, at one time we were

As a follow-up to my previous Post 793 and to level set on the proposed amendment to Rule 9, the proposed Rule clearly provides for Below is the text of the proposed amended rule copied from N4MB's

Ria, the plain text of the proposed amendment is specifically limited to remote operations. The proposal does not seek to change the “single entity” Dxcc rule for non-remote operations. If its

Well that is not right. If this person lived in RI and worked a ATNO in Nebraska then drove to Nevada and worked another ATNO, he could only claim one of these. That is wrong in so many ways. We have

They would only be able to claim from one location. This rule is not targeted specifically at remotes. Ria N2RJ

Okay, but can only have one of these secondary locations correct? What about someone with a motorhome, and travels all over their country. How will that work? As the rules apply now that wouldn't be

You can. Designate it as your separate location. Ria N2RJ

So if I have a cabin 201km away from my home I can't use it to work DX entities for credit? Is this correct? 73 Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

1. once per year. a,b,c - you misunderstand the rule. This location is not your preferred amateur radio remote service provider. Rather, it is a geographical location with a circle TBD. 200km? d.

Good question.  All in the proposal.  To be considered. Steve, N4JQQ, DXAC, Delta

Question? AND Designate one additional location to work DX from and have it count for DXCC. 1. How often can you change this one location? a. What if they go out of business? b. What if they

I was addressing this message Ria, not the 50 mile limit one. Sorry I should have quoted it. 73, Lou W0FK

I quoted 50 miles as an example of what is in an existing ARRL award. It was not intended to set a distance limit for Dave's proposal. I thought I was pretty clear about that. Ria N2RJ

I believe Ria was addressing the Proposed rule relative to Remote Stations. No change to a QSO made anywhere in a DXCC country by the “traditional” method if operator and transmitter are together.

Succinct, reasonable, and fair it seems to me. The distance is a challenge to determine, but seemingly not impossible. IMHO, 50 miles is way too small an area. It takes at least 100-200 to get out

Steve I don't get that one either. I live in Pennsylvania. So if I go on vacation and work P5 from say Nebraska and then go to New Mexico and work BS7H I can only count one of these??? What's up with