Re: Remote Operation
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Just my 4 cents worth of interpretation…
Is not the primary Control Point that point (location) located where an operator controls the transmitter (per ARRL/FCC wordage)? – In other words if the Control OP is in Hawaii and the transmitter is in Australia, then the control op position would also be the control point – i.e. in Hawaii? Therefore the logging location would be the Control Point location. Of course, as previously noted, other countries will have their own governing rules so our interpretation may not be fully applicable here.
Although I can certainly see where the transmitter location would be most important since I might not be able to hear Hawaii but could hear Australia…
Unless I seriously misunderstand this rule (never really looked into it seriously as I have not worked a remote before, thus no need to study and fully interpreted) feel free to expound where my misunderstanding lies.
From: 'Mike Flowers' mike.flowers@...  [mailto:070@...]
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 17:04
Subject: RE:  Remote Operation
For DXCC purposes, the ARRL recently made rule changes about remote operation:
“The DXCC Rules changes, which affect Section I, subsections 8 and 9, explain and extend how contacts with remotely controlled stations now may be applied toward the DXCC award. According to ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, the changes are subtle but significant. The modified rules make clear that contacts with legally licensed, land-based, remotely controlled stations count for DXCC, but the control point — the operator’s location — of a remotely controlled station no longer has to be land based; the operator can be literally anywhere.
“It has always been permitted for a QSO to count for both stations, if either station was operated remotely from a control point within the same DXCC entity,” Sumner explained. “Now the location of the operator doesn’t matter; the operator could be on the far side of the Moon if he or she could figure out how to remotely control a station on land back on Earth from there.” Transmitter location continues to define a station’s location, and, for DXCC purposes, all transmitters and receivers must be located within a 500-meter diameter circle, excluding antennas.”
That’s just the ARRL, and other licensing entities may well have other views on the matter.
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
This is what is confusing. If I have contact with a fellow in HI who is operating his WA stn am I in contact with HI or WA. I would think that I should log the TX locn and the fact that he is in HI is just for interest. Then we have the case of folks who have no station and rent out the "by the minute big stations". Do they need to keep a record of which stn they are operating for each contact or do they just use their home QTH. I don't know if you can get a licence in Australia without owning the equipment as that appears to be what they licence.
Any regulatory rule about this obviously need not make any sense at all, as regulatory rules need not make sense, they’re just the rules.
So setting aside the regulatory bit for a moment I’d vote for the sensible thing being using the location whence the radiation originates when you transmit. That results in some weirdness if your transmit antenna is widely separated from your receive antenna but I don’t how to resolve that sensibly.
I am mindful of a discussion I had with K7ADD about the time he was in HI running his portable rig and operating his home station in Duvall, WA remotely, and he held a PSK qso with himself.
Beyond the novelty of such a QSO whatever scheme you use to report location ought to be able log both sides of such a QSO and have the locations logged on each side make sense and convey what has happened, I would think.