DXCC, Remoting and Moving Around
Locked
DXCC, Remoting and Moving Around
 
|
It is reported that Glanville Williams, a now SK Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London, once quipped that, "The difference between a difference in kind and a difference in degree is almost always a difference in degree." I can't verify that, but it's a well-cited legend in my field.
The problems of remoting and moving raised for DXCC, whose rule is all-too simple, were inevitable in an Internet environment and really ought to be updated. But how? I began again as Jim did when I moved from Connecticut, at ocean's edge, to Colorado on mountain's peak, although under the DXCC rules my official standing -- which isn't much anyway -- combines the two. I didn't move for that purpose; but that shouldn't matter. Remoting is more subtle. My fixed station is at my mountain QTH, 100 miles from Denver. My Denver home is HOA-limited and due to foil-backed insulation in every wall is effectively a Faraday cage. I am looking into remoting by Internet over that 100 miles. If I do that, I personally would be comfortable adding any new ones to the ones I got while sitting on the mountain. But there is no way I would feel right about adding an ATNO I snagged if I rented a station on the Atlantic or Pacific coast for the occasion and remoted from Denver to there. Is that a difference in kind, because I own one and don't own the other? A difference in degree because one's 100 miles and the other is over 1,000? How about if I had a summer place on Nantucket and I personally owned the equipment there, operating it remotely from Colorado? A difference in kind, or a difference in degree? Again, and as others have said, I compete for me and against me, and I know from where I snagged what. But some hams compete against other hams and that is, generally speaking, to the good as well. So what should the rules be? The WAS rule, I believe, says within a 50 mile radius. I am one QSL short of 5BWAS because NE on 10 from my side of the Continental Divide in CO has eluded me for more than a decade. I could drive to the CO/NE state line with a KX3 in the car but that would be a rule violation, so I haven't. Should there be a radius limit for DXCC as well? Should remoting be a separate rule of some sort? I think Professor Williams, who so far as I know was not a ham, would have enjoyed this imbroglio. Ted, KN1CBR ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:17:21 -0700 From: Fred Jensen <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Bouvet Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed I wonder sometimes if DXCC has become an oxymoron of magnitude similar to NTS?? When originally conceived, actually contacting 100 "countries" was a huge endeavor.? Even making transoceanic contacts between the largest of stations was very difficult.? Today's world is so very very different.? When So. Sudan showed up, a new-ish ham said to me, "I've never seen such pileups!"? I told him, "ATNO for everyone and those who sit at the top of the list with 'all' of them need to keep their seats." After I worked BS7H, I showed my wife a photo of W6RGG at one of the positions.? She said, "You count that rock as a country?"? I started to explain and then passed, the rock is claimed by more than one country of course and I'd already been through it with her over VP6DI. As I said when I started this, I just wondered recently while in the shower. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 3/23/2019 6:52 PM, Jim Brown wrote: > ?On 3/23/2019 2:34 PM, ab2tc wrote: >> But if I work Bouvet using this remote, can I really claim >> DXCC credit for myself for it? > DXCC rules say that you can count a QSO made from any STATION location > (that is, where RF is transmitted and received,) anywhere in the lower > 48 states. >> It would seem exceptionally unfair. Doesn't >> ARRL have a rule for as how far you can move from place to place and >> still >> claim accumulated DXCC credits? > > Yep. > >> I find this highly troubling. > > Me too. When I moved from Chicago to NorCal 12 years ago I started > over with DXCC. There's a guy who takes pride in being at/near the top > of DXCC on 160M, but he started in CO, then moved to NC.? I strongly > approve of operating remotely from a station that is close to you, > especially if you built the station!? I view with contempt those who > would use remote operation of a station much much closer to DX than > their own, or even rent that station and travel to it, and count QSOs > made from that station for DXCC. > > 73, Jim K9YC ------------------------------ ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
Hi,
The following snippet is from a recent posting by Ted, KN1CBR: "So what should the rules be? The WAS rule, I believe, says within a 50 mile radius. I am one QSL short of 5BWAS because NE on 10 from my side of the Continental Divide in CO has eluded me for more than a decade. I could drive to the CO/NE state line with a KX3 in the car but that would be a rule violation, so I haven't. Should there be a radius limit for DXCC as well?" Adopting the 50 mile radius for DXCC as well as WAS seems a very reasonable idea. It seems to be manageable for WAS so why wouldn't it be for DXCC, too. I wasn't aware of the 50 mile radius for WAS. I have multiband WAS all done from one location. AB2TC - Knut -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: DXCC, Remoting and Moving Around
|
|
Before being cut off by Eric, I want to point out that there was a 50 mile radius for DXCC also prior to the early or mid-80s. I can't remember when the ARRL changed it.
The ARRL decided to remove the rule and change to contacts had to be made from the same DXCC entity. This was done according to the ARRL because of the changing demographics as people were more mobile than when the DXCC rules were formed. People were moving more frequently due to job and family requirements. Now we have a proposal to go back to a 50 mile radius. I don't think that will happen. Though there may be a need to change it to something other than the same DXCC entity. As, to me, it seems to be a bit unfair as DXCC entities vary greatly in size. Mark, WB9CIF -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of ab2tc Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2019 16:44 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] DXCC, Remoting and Moving Around Hi, The following snippet is from a recent posting by Ted, KN1CBR: "So what should the rules be? The WAS rule, I believe, says within a 50 mile radius. I am one QSL short of 5BWAS because NE on 10 from my side of the Continental Divide in CO has eluded me for more than a decade. I could drive to the CO/NE state line with a KX3 in the car but that would be a rule violation, so I haven't. Should there be a radius limit for DXCC as well?" Adopting the 50 mile radius for DXCC as well as WAS seems a very reasonable idea. It seems to be manageable for WAS so why wouldn't it be for DXCC, too. I wasn't aware of the 50 mile radius for WAS. I have multiband WAS all done from one location. AB2TC - Knut -- Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/ ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
Before 1977, DXCC Rule 9 stated that all contacts had to be made from within
the same call area or within a 175-mile radius if the call area changed. In 1970, I moved from IA to IL (330 miles) and had to start over, which seemed unreasonable to me. I moved to AZ in 1972 and was happy that I could pick up from where I left off when I was a college student in IA when the rule changed in 1977. Jim N7US -----Original Message----- Before being cut off by Eric, I want to point out that there was a 50 mile radius for DXCC also prior to the early or mid-80s. I can't remember when the ARRL changed it. The ARRL decided to remove the rule and change to contacts had to be made from the same DXCC entity. This was done according to the ARRL because of the changing demographics as people were more mobile than when the DXCC rules were formed. People were moving more frequently due to job and family requirements. Now we have a proposal to go back to a 50 mile radius. I don't think that will happen. Though there may be a need to change it to something other than the same DXCC entity. As, to me, it seems to be a bit unfair as DXCC entities vary greatly in size. Mark, WB9CIF ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |