In July, the DX Advisory Committee Report recommended several rules changes for the DXCC program. Among them, was a recommendation that rule I.9 be changed such that a QSO is acceptable for DXCC credit only when the remote station and the operator’s home station location are no more than 200 km apart.
As with any rule change, this precipitated a lot of comment in the amateur radio community. A thread on the eHam.Net forum got quite a few comments. N7NG had a nice blog post on this controversy.
Perhaps the most strident post on this topic was written by WW1X. He called these recommendations “uninformed, misguided, and detrimental to the future of our hobby.” Detrimental to the future of our hobby? Seriously?
Of course, WW1X has a vested interest in this debate. He’s the lead developer for RemoteHamRadio.Com (RHR), a company that charges other hams to use the “super stations” that they’ve set up around the world.
Note that the DX Advisory Committee is not saying that amateur radio operators should not use and enjoy these remote stations. All they’re saying is that the QSOs made with them, unless they are located less than 200 km from an amateur’s home station, are not eligible for DXCC credit. I’m sure that if you asked any of the members of the committee they would agree with WW1X that the remote stations serve a very useful purpose for amateurs who are not able to set up their own home stations.
WW1X prattles on about how “DXCC is not a contest. It’s not a competition. There are no winners or losers. It’s a personal achievement award, plain and simple.” This is just silly. Of course it’s a competition. As N7NG rightly points out if it’s not a competition, why publish the DXCC Honor Roll?
What I think is detrimental to the hobby are hams who use RemoteHamRadio.Com to simply add to their DXCC scores. I see no sense in doing so, and furthermore, where’s the personal achievement? Anyone who can afford to pay what they charge—and it’s not a small sum of money—can work the rarest DX with one of those stations.
A friend of mine, Mark, W8MP, is an RHR customer. He loves being able to work DX from his home in a development where no outside antennas are allowed. He does this for the pure love of talking to other hams in far-away places. I don’t know for sure, but I don’t think he’s trying to pad his DXCC score, and even if he did, I’m sure that doing so is a very low priority for him.
If you ask me, that’s what RHR should be all about. Instead of complaining about the DXCC rules that might affect their bottom line, they should be taking the high road and talking up how their service promotes the “continuation and extension of the amateur’s unique ability to enhance international goodwill.” If your not sure where that came from, have a look at Part 97.1(e) of the FCC rules that govern amateur radio.
Larry W2LJ says
Dan, if this was a “tweet” I would have “favorite’d” it, to borrow a term.
I think you accurately captured the heart of the issue and offered the common sense point of it.
Larry W2LJ
Mark W8MP says
For what it is worth, I do not have my DXCC. Never even submitted a single card. So that eliminates this argument for me. I went through all that when I got my Worked All Counties.
That being said, I do very much enjoy remote ham radio. Once I realized that I could actually make a contact instead of listening on the sidelines with my 100 watts and indoor dipole hoping to get through, I actually now turn the radio on.
To me the real issue is not whether it counts for DXCC (who is going to effectively monitor 200km?) but whether I turn the radio on at all. If I am able to actually make contacts, I am more likely to turn the radio on. Ultimately this keeps me involved.
To that end, the DXCC thing is an honor system, no matter how many checks and balances you throw at the individual. These remote systems will ultimately fail if they depend solely on the DX QSO because DXCC involves chasing a finite ever diminishing number of entities.
Maybe we should do like the county hunters do and work DXCC a second (and third and fourth etc time). It certainly one of the attractions that keeps me interested in county hunting.
I happen to agree with WW1X. Any rule that stifles progress is one that really harms all of us. There needs to be some way of being “inclusive” as we need more activity.
Clearly I live in a place that I can not have the antenna system I want and can afford. I am not in a position to move any time soon. Using a remote system simply gives me more opportunity to stay involved with ham radio. It has been fantastic!
The particular service provider I have chosen (RHR) is actually keenly aware of the price issue, and has a service that is in the $100 range to get on. This remote type of operation will never replace the magic of my own radio and antenna that I remember as a 14 year old when I got my first license. At that time I was using a crystal (and I owned 3) and I am certainly not going back to that type of operation. For a significant segment of hams, this is the answer when the choice is whether to turn the radio on or not……
Dan KB6NU says
I also agree with WW1X that any rule that stifles progress harms amateur radio, but does this rule really stifle progress? It doesn’t try in any way to outlaw remote operation.
Jeffrey Davis, KE9V says
I don’t see the point in the 200km limit. Either a radio contact via a remote station is valid or it isn’t. The big problem here is that we again run smack into the amazing things the internet can help us do, and whether or not that’s “real radio”.
Your friend may say he just enjoys chatting with stations in faraway places, but then why not just use the Internet to do it? That kind of communication happens millions of times a day and we just call it “conversation”. Why pay a small fortune for the ability to do that via an internet connected radio at all?
I’m so confused my head hurts!
Bob K0NR says
If I am reading the proposed changes correctly, the 200 km limit only applies to remotely controlled stations. The general rule of having to make all contacts within the same DXCC entity (country) still stands. So I can drive to anywhere in the US, borrow/rent a big gun station and get credit for DXCC contacts. But if I use TCP/IP to access the station (>200 kM), no credit. I supposed the same is true if I have a 201 km microphone cable.
Seems inconsistent to me.
73, Bob K0NR
Dan KB6NU says
Bob, Jeff: I actually agree that the 200 km limit seems nonsensical. If they want to disqualify contacts made at borrowed/rented “big gun” stations, whether remotely controlled or locally controlled, they should just do so.
Maybe there’s something that I’m missing, though. Perhaps I’ll e-mail the hams on the DXAC and see if I can get one of them to comment here.
The other thing that got me going on this issue is WW1X’s post. In that post, he tries to justify his position based on some lofty ideas, but it seems to me he’s just trying to protect his revenue stream.
Jeff, KE9V says
Maybe a bit more light, but you probably won’t like it. I asked this question about the 200km limit (124 miles) of some big dog DXers. They were quick to point out that this was only their “opinion” but said that over the years, many of the top shelf DXers have built a remote stations. This, mostly in places like California where life in San Francisco, as an example, makes DX tough going. So some of the wealthier fellows build a “super station” out in the mountains 100 miles from their shacks. This has been deemed “acceptable” — maybe because of the size of their contributions to certain DX Foundations?
But now that getting your hands on a powerful remote station is becoming a ‘regular’ business, the DXCC advisors would like to nip that without ticking off the guys who have made Honor Roll via remote operation…
Life, and ham radio can be weird sometimes…
73, Jeff KE9V
Dan KB6NU says
I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the “big dog” DXers were behind this rule change. After all, when anyone can rent a super station and work just about any DX that’s out there and run up their DXCC totals, what’s the fun in being a “big dog”?
Personally, I don’t care a whit about this rule change. I don’t intend on setting up a remote station anytime soon, nor do I plan to rent one of these super stations to pad my DXCC score. When you get right doewn to it, how many people will this rule change effect? 100? 1,000?
I actually think remote stations are kind of cool, and they do allow people who otherwise couldn’t get on the air to do so. More people on the air is a good thing.
What I object most to is WW1X’s bombastic blog post. It’s just silly to say that this rule change would be detrimental to amateur radio, when at most, it would be detrimental to RemoteHamRadio’s bottom line.
Oddly enough, this blog post seems to have struck a chord, both with the ham radio community and with RemoteHam Radio. Yesterday, three of RemoteHamRadio’s principals sent me donations, including WW1X. One said that as a result of this publicity, they have seen an uptick in customers.
Like you said, “Life and ham radio can be weird sometimes.”
Jeff, KE9V says
I actually like the idea of RemoteHamRadio. If it’s successful it might mean more traffic on the bands which is a good thing. Like you, I’m not their “target” customer and won’t be signing up for an account. Though I do plan to set something up here in the KE9V Shack so I can access my station from the road — where I seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time.
But here’s the thing, those who do use a premium remote service may end up adding to their DXCC totals and other awards but they will likely live under the same stigma as Echolink users or no-code Extra class licensees and as we’ve come to see, that will take a little shine off their prizes…
73, Jeff
Dave K7RPM says
The 200km limit seems awfully arbitrary and hard to justify. 201km is no-no but 2km down the road is OK?
Randy says
Well, thankfully, the ARRL Board disagreed with you tonight. Their forward-thinking press release affirming remote operation was posted on January 21, 2015.
Dan KB6NU says
The news that Randy is referring to is ARRL Board Okays Changes to DXCC Program, VHF and Above Contesting Rules.
I never said that QSOs made with personal remote stations should not count for DXCC credit. If you set up the station and make contacts with it, you should get credit for it.
I still don’t think that DXCC credit should be given for contacts made with remote stations that you simply pay to use. Basically, you’re paying to get on the Honor Roll. Where’s the honor and personal achievement in doing that?
Not only that, I would think that those who go to all the trouble and expense to set up their own remote stations would agree with me on that. Their hard work in making the Honor Roll is diminished by–in effect–allowing people to pay to get on it.