Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Hello all For my opinion ham radio is a hobby, and my personal goal is to improve my skill to achieve DX contacts. The rules of the game are known for every one. All of us are volunteers on that game. Many people have the religion that DXCC Honor Roll is the key to open the doors of glory. In the world of winners and losers the way for sweet smell of success is driven with various tips and tricks. Pure superstition! Of course the evil is not the SDR technology either the web. The web controlled receivers maybe is a useful tool for a ham to check what the other side listen. But some delay is necessary to stop the bad use. Some people too make theirs QSOs with a little help from some friends. Some people send CW many times, maybe listen(?) their callsign from the other side, and then send direct QSL card with some special donation too! I disagree absolutely. For that reason I decided to not send any application for DXCC Award. My personal success is on my logbook and is valuable only for me. A useful tool is the LOTW too. In my country a few hams interested for DXing, and fewers for contesting. For that reason I am pleased to have some awards on contesting deep on my files (not on the walls) but all with ...minimal score. My equipment and time is minimal too. I am pleased and hope making better on the future. For my pleasure only! Let's have some fun, we have a beautiful hobby and the life is too sort for lies! And none can lie themselves! 73 Panos Dalakos, SV1GRD ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
SV1GRD wrote: My personal success is on my logbook and is valuable only for me. Ths sad truth: We even cannot rely on this value. We don´t know where the RX is situated of the station we are calling. I once worked in a 160m-contest with 50 W to a lowwire at 5m. None of the qsos reached out farther than 1500km - with the exception of one that was 4000km, quick and easy as with a local. I may tranquilize my sceptic brain with the ohhh so great possible receiving system on his end (hearing my qrp signal on 40m a few weeks later again with complete ease). Or I can think about the DX-station running EU on 80 SSB - asking for repeats only for that letters that I (listening in EU) missed, too - due to short QRN-bursts... I still believe in most stations on the other end. But I cannot be sure that my signal reached a few thousand kilometers to him - and not only to his receiving device in Europe. And that is the really sad thing with that kind of cheating. It has the potential to devalue the feeling of personal success for all those not cheating. The cheater steals our little personal satisfaction with an supposed achievement due to the nagging doubt fed by such instances. Sad. 73, Chris (www.dl8mbs.de) ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
From the cluster, true or false: OE3GCU 1822.5 3D2R pse help.vk3 remote dwn1728 03 Oct Rotuma Island OE3GCU 1822.5 3D2R remote rx vk3 dwn.pse help 1505 03 Oct Rotuma Island Someone must fix that vk3 remote rx.. I agree with Thor, Filipe, Kostas and others, fix your RX antennas and enjoy working DX with your own stuff. Satisfaction guaranteed. 73 de Peter SM2CEW www.sm2cew.com At 19:25 2011-10-07 , ct1...@sapo.pt wrote: Why use SDRs when there are Beverages, Pennants, K9AY loops? does one feel satisfied knowing he/she worked a rare DX station using someone else's RX antennas? if you are really into DXing you will feel bad about it. T32C heard 3 times now using single 170m long beverage towards W6 (recording available for anyone who wants to know how it sounds in Northern CT). If you hear it, you work it, simple as this. Filipe CT1ILT aka CR6K Citando Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr: Anyone who makes available his sdr without delay, just helps cheaters. We all know some of them who use a sdr receiver to make qsos. Maybe there is no need anymore to learn the calls. Just stop this. A delay of 1min for example is perfect to enjoy all the goods of an sdr receiver without helping cheaters. I don't know if software allows it but i don't think it is difficult. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson otrada...@gmail.com To: Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com; topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. http://microtelecom.it/map/PerseusServers.html shows a map of remote Perseus receivers. However, reading your post on the topband reflector got me thinking that the scenario was familiar: I am hearing a station in the Caribbean on 160m with strong signals and I start calling him thinking he will be an easy QSO I call him constantly for about two hours without luck. In the beginning I do not have any propagation to EU, but he is working EU with a fairly good rate. When his signals have almost disappeared (RST 339) at my location and propagation has changed from TF to EU away from the Caribbean (!), he finally hears me and we had a QSO. This is cheating on so many levels I don?t know where to begin... the DX station is listening to a receiver located in EU - and because the DX has a good transmit antenna on an island surrounded by Salt Water he has a relatively good signal in EU - but the DX suffers from high tropical noise making it difficult for him to hear the weaker signals. With the remote receiver, he can now clearly hear even the poorest signal from EU - stations with poor antennas are now able to work the DX station even though their setups should not be able to work any DX contacts at all - on the cluster the DX is spotted good ears hears well worked with 5 watts and window antenna and so on At the same time, one of the most powerful stations on the planet is unable to get through since I did not have propagation to EU! All the effort of building a superb station, trying to make use of elusive short propagation openings, all of this is flushed down the toiletand I am hearing that contesters have been doing this for years ! So this is the reason that the 599+40 station can?t hear me! not even a ? sometimes. And here I was naive enough to think there was a rational explanation - this might be because the stations were using directive antennas and were listening in another direction - certainly plausible, I myself have long Beverage antennas which will have this effectI have even heard this explained as one way propagation I well remember my QSO with KH2L on Top Band a few years ago that was ruined by HB9... who was obviously using a remote receiver to help him hear the DX - the HB9 kept calling completely out of sync about 30 seconds off sync right on top of my transmissions during the QSO, he managed to ruin my QSO completely and it took me a whole year before I heard and worked KH2L again.I remember there was a russian station who was also calling in sync with the HB9 - both obviously with a similar internet delay. I have decided not to make my Perseus receiver available over the internet anymore because of these issues. Not naming the cheater only serves to create suspicion on other DX
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
What is the change and how a general listener is punished betwwen now and hear 30 sec later. I listen fm radio from internet. I can notice a difference over 30 sec between real and internet radio. Even i listen games of my favorite team and maybe i listen the goal 30 secs later, i prefer internet radio because it is easier for me when i am in fornt of the computer. And anyway i can not find any difference. Just my 2 cents. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: mstang...@comcast.net To: Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr Cc: topband@contesting.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 11:48 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Why should the general listener be punished because of some cheaters. A delay is not necessary; we just need ethical contesters. This is also no worse than contesters who use DX clusters or DX spots do locate DX stations. I'm old fashioned. We shouldn't use any external communications infrastructure when making QSO's. Mike N2MS - Original Message - From: Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 15:58:55 - (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Anyone who makes available his sdr without delay, just helps cheaters. We all know some of them who use a sdr receiver to make qsos. Maybe there is no need anymore to learn the calls. Just stop this. A delay of 1min for example is perfect to enjoy all the goods of an sdr receiver without helping cheaters. I don't know if software allows it but i don't think it is difficult. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson To: Brendan Minish ; Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
It is simply beyond me how anyone can get any satisfaction from making a QSO using a web SDR; ultimately of course they are fooling themselves into believing that they have a high performance station when the opposite is true. It took me 33 years to work KH6 on 160m - an unforgettable experience and one of the best moments of my Amateur Radio 'career'; the same RX/TX antenna is still in the air and occasionally when out in the field I still hear myself saying Did I really work Zone 31 on that? ): 73 Cris GM4FAM Why use SDRs when there are Beverages, Pennants, K9AY loops? does one feel satisfied knowing he/she worked a rare DX station using someone else's RX antennas? if you are really into DXing you will feel bad about it. T32C heard 3 times now using single 170m long beverage towards W6 (recording available for anyone who wants to know how it sounds in Northern CT). If you hear it, you work it, simple as this. Filipe CT1ILT aka CR6K Citando Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr: Anyone who makes available his sdr without delay, just helps cheaters. We all know some of them who use a sdr receiver to make qsos. Maybe there is no need anymore to learn the calls. Just stop this. A delay of 1min for example is perfect to enjoy all the goods of an sdr receiver without helping cheaters. I don't know if software allows it but i don't think it is difficult. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson otrada...@gmail.com To: Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com; topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. http://microtelecom.it/map/PerseusServers.html shows a map of remote Perseus receivers. However, reading your post on the topband reflector got me thinking that the scenario was familiar: I am hearing a station in the Caribbean on 160m with strong signals and I start calling him thinking he will be an easy QSO I call him constantly for about two hours without luck. In the beginning I do not have any propagation to EU, but he is working EU with a fairly good rate. When his signals have almost disappeared (RST 339) at my location and propagation has changed from TF to EU away from the Caribbean (!), he finally hears me and we had a QSO. This is cheating on so many levels I don?t know where to begin... the DX station is listening to a receiver located in EU - and because the DX has a good transmit antenna on an island surrounded by Salt Water he has a relatively good signal in EU - but the DX suffers from high tropical noise making it difficult for him to hear the weaker signals. With the remote receiver, he can now clearly hear even the poorest signal from EU - stations with poor antennas are now able to work the DX station even though their setups should not be able to work any DX contacts at all - on the cluster the DX is spotted good ears hears well worked with 5 watts and window antenna and so on At the same time, one of the most powerful stations on the planet is unable to get through since I did not have propagation to EU! All the effort of building a superb station, trying to make use of elusive short propagation openings, all of this is flushed down the toiletand I am hearing that contesters have been doing this for years ! So this is the reason that the 599+40 station can?t hear me! not even a ? sometimes. And here I was naive enough to think there was a rational explanation - this might be because the stations were using directive antennas and were listening in another direction - certainly plausible, I myself have long Beverage antennas which will have this effectI have even heard this explained as one way propagation I well remember my QSO with KH2L on Top Band a few years ago that was ruined by HB9... who was obviously using a remote receiver to help him hear the DX - the HB9 kept calling completely out of sync about 30 seconds off sync right on top of my transmissions during the QSO, he managed to ruin my QSO completely and it took me a whole year before I heard and worked KH2L again.I remember there was a russian station who was also calling in sync with the HB9 - both obviously with a similar internet delay. I have decided not to make my Perseus receiver available over the internet
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. http://microtelecom.it/map/PerseusServers.html shows a map of remote Perseus receivers. However, reading your post on the topband reflector got me thinking that the scenario was familiar: I am hearing a station in the Caribbean on 160m with strong signals and I start calling him thinking he will be an easy QSO I call him constantly for about two hours without luck. In the beginning I do not have any propagation to EU, but he is working EU with a fairly good rate. When his signals have almost disappeared (RST 339) at my location and propagation has changed from TF to EU away from the Caribbean (!), he finally hears me and we had a QSO. This is cheating on so many levels I don´t know where to begin... the DX station is listening to a receiver located in EU - and because the DX has a good transmit antenna on an island surrounded by Salt Water he has a relatively good signal in EU - but the DX suffers from high tropical noise making it difficult for him to hear the weaker signals. With the remote receiver, he can now clearly hear even the poorest signal from EU - stations with poor antennas are now able to work the DX station even though their setups should not be able to work any DX contacts at all - on the cluster the DX is spotted good ears hears well worked with 5 watts and window antenna and so on At the same time, one of the most powerful stations on the planet is unable to get through since I did not have propagation to EU! All the effort of building a superb station, trying to make use of elusive short propagation openings, all of this is flushed down the toiletand I am hearing that contesters have been doing this for years ! So this is the reason that the 599+40 station can´t hear me! not even a ? sometimes. And here I was naive enough to think there was a rational explanation - this might be because the stations were using directive antennas and were listening in another direction - certainly plausible, I myself have long Beverage antennas which will have this effectI have even heard this explained as one way propagation I well remember my QSO with KH2L on Top Band a few years ago that was ruined by HB9... who was obviously using a remote receiver to help him hear the DX - the HB9 kept calling completely out of sync about 30 seconds off sync right on top of my transmissions during the QSO, he managed to ruin my QSO completely and it took me a whole year before I heard and worked KH2L again.I remember there was a russian station who was also calling in sync with the HB9 - both obviously with a similar internet delay. I have decided not to make my Perseus receiver available over the internet anymore because of these issues. Not naming the cheater only serves to create suspicion on other DX stations and ruins the sense of accomplishment in making long haul DX contacts. Any contacts made in this manner are not valid for any award purposes - after all they are simply contacts over the Internet - only by naming the cheaters can we put a stop to these practices - at the very least we should not tolerate this behavior on 160 Meters. 73 Thor, TF4M Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
I'm with you on this one Thor, internet gateways should be banned from DX, even if they are located in the same DXCC Entity, even in this small country propagation is diferent from north to south, but imagine you are in New-York and working a remote station in California, it is good for DXCC but its no fairplay at all, the same as working a repeater. It should not be allowed. I'm quite happy of waking up everyday at 6 o'clock in the morning local time and try to listen for T32C in Topband, no luck for a QSO so far, neither for our topband guru Markku CT1FJK, but happy to be using the good oldfashioned way, a radio, antenna and 1.5 Kilowatt, Hi! 73 Jose CT1EEB - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson otrada...@gmail.com To: Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com; topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 4:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. http://microtelecom.it/map/PerseusServers.html shows a map of remote Perseus receivers. However, reading your post on the topband reflector got me thinking that the scenario was familiar: I am hearing a station in the Caribbean on 160m with strong signals and I start calling him thinking he will be an easy QSO I call him constantly for about two hours without luck. In the beginning I do not have any propagation to EU, but he is working EU with a fairly good rate. When his signals have almost disappeared (RST 339) at my location and propagation has changed from TF to EU away from the Caribbean (!), he finally hears me and we had a QSO. This is cheating on so many levels I don´t know where to begin... the DX station is listening to a receiver located in EU - and because the DX has a good transmit antenna on an island surrounded by Salt Water he has a relatively good signal in EU - but the DX suffers from high tropical noise making it difficult for him to hear the weaker signals. With the remote receiver, he can now clearly hear even the poorest signal from EU - stations with poor antennas are now able to work the DX station even though their setups should not be able to work any DX contacts at all - on the cluster the DX is spotted good ears hears well worked with 5 watts and window antenna and so on At the same time, one of the most powerful stations on the planet is unable to get through since I did not have propagation to EU! All the effort of building a superb station, trying to make use of elusive short propagation openings, all of this is flushed down the toiletand I am hearing that contesters have been doing this for years ! So this is the reason that the 599+40 station can´t hear me! not even a ? sometimes. And here I was naive enough to think there was a rational explanation - this might be because the stations were using directive antennas and were listening in another direction - certainly plausible, I myself have long Beverage antennas which will have this effectI have even heard this explained as one way propagation I well remember my QSO with KH2L on Top Band a few years ago that was ruined by HB9... who was obviously using a remote receiver to help him hear the DX - the HB9 kept calling completely out of sync about 30 seconds off sync right on top of my transmissions during the QSO, he managed to ruin my QSO completely and it took me a whole year before I heard and worked KH2L again.I remember there was a russian station who was also calling in sync with the HB9 - both obviously with a similar internet delay. I have decided not to make my Perseus receiver available over the internet anymore because of these issues. Not naming the cheater only serves to create suspicion on other DX stations and ruins the sense of accomplishment in making long haul DX contacts. Any contacts made in this manner are not valid for any award purposes - after all they are simply contacts over the Internet - only by naming the cheaters can we put a stop to these practices - at the very least we should not tolerate this behavior on 160 Meters. 73 Thor, TF4M Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Speaking as one who lives in the US, there used to be a 275 mile (approx 450km) limit for counting QSOs for DXCC. If you moved more than that distance, you had to start your DXCC over again. Personally, I think that was too restrictive but removing the limit entirely is worse! Conditions from the US east coast favor EU and AF while from the west coast favor the Pacific area. Some fortunate people have lived on both coasts and consequently have been able to run up big totals on the low bands. The ARRL has stopped writing rules it cannot enforce. Virtually anything goes today. It is even possible to be on the Honor Roll without making a single contact yourself. Clinton DeSoto is spinning in his grave! I pay little attention to the big totals I see posted. After all, I don't know if they were made honestly or not. When I look in the mirror, I KNOW how my totals were achieved and that's what REALLY counts! 73, Roger On 10/7/2011 10:29 AM, Jose E. Ribeiro Sa wrote: I'm with you on this one Thor, internet gateways should be banned from DX, even if they are located in the same DXCC Entity, even in this small country propagation is diferent from north to south, but imagine you are in New-York and working a remote station in California, it is good for DXCC but its no fairplay at all, the same as working a repeater. It should not be allowed. I'm quite happy of waking up everyday at 6 o'clock in the morning local time and try to listen for T32C in Topband, no luck for a QSO so far, neither for our topband guru Markku CT1FJK, but happy to be using the good oldfashioned way, a radio, antenna and 1.5 Kilowatt, Hi! 73 Jose CT1EEB ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Why use SDRs when there are Beverages, Pennants, K9AY loops? does one feel satisfied knowing he/she worked a rare DX station using someone else's RX antennas? if you are really into DXing you will feel bad about it. T32C heard 3 times now using single 170m long beverage towards W6 (recording available for anyone who wants to know how it sounds in Northern CT). If you hear it, you work it, simple as this. Filipe CT1ILT aka CR6K Citando Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr: Anyone who makes available his sdr without delay, just helps cheaters. We all know some of them who use a sdr receiver to make qsos. Maybe there is no need anymore to learn the calls. Just stop this. A delay of 1min for example is perfect to enjoy all the goods of an sdr receiver without helping cheaters. I don't know if software allows it but i don't think it is difficult. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson otrada...@gmail.com To: Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com; topband@contesting.com Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. http://microtelecom.it/map/PerseusServers.html shows a map of remote Perseus receivers. However, reading your post on the topband reflector got me thinking that the scenario was familiar: I am hearing a station in the Caribbean on 160m with strong signals and I start calling him thinking he will be an easy QSO I call him constantly for about two hours without luck. In the beginning I do not have any propagation to EU, but he is working EU with a fairly good rate. When his signals have almost disappeared (RST 339) at my location and propagation has changed from TF to EU away from the Caribbean (!), he finally hears me and we had a QSO. This is cheating on so many levels I don?t know where to begin... the DX station is listening to a receiver located in EU - and because the DX has a good transmit antenna on an island surrounded by Salt Water he has a relatively good signal in EU - but the DX suffers from high tropical noise making it difficult for him to hear the weaker signals. With the remote receiver, he can now clearly hear even the poorest signal from EU - stations with poor antennas are now able to work the DX station even though their setups should not be able to work any DX contacts at all - on the cluster the DX is spotted good ears hears well worked with 5 watts and window antenna and so on At the same time, one of the most powerful stations on the planet is unable to get through since I did not have propagation to EU! All the effort of building a superb station, trying to make use of elusive short propagation openings, all of this is flushed down the toiletand I am hearing that contesters have been doing this for years ! So this is the reason that the 599+40 station can?t hear me! not even a ? sometimes. And here I was naive enough to think there was a rational explanation - this might be because the stations were using directive antennas and were listening in another direction - certainly plausible, I myself have long Beverage antennas which will have this effectI have even heard this explained as one way propagation I well remember my QSO with KH2L on Top Band a few years ago that was ruined by HB9... who was obviously using a remote receiver to help him hear the DX - the HB9 kept calling completely out of sync about 30 seconds off sync right on top of my transmissions during the QSO, he managed to ruin my QSO completely and it took me a whole year before I heard and worked KH2L again.I remember there was a russian station who was also calling in sync with the HB9 - both obviously with a similar internet delay. I have decided not to make my Perseus receiver available over the internet anymore because of these issues. Not naming the cheater only serves to create suspicion on other DX stations and ruins the sense of accomplishment in making long haul DX contacts. Any contacts made in this manner are not valid for any award purposes - after all they are simply contacts over the Internet - only by naming the cheaters can we put a stop to these practices - at the very least we should not tolerate this behavior on 160 Meters. 73 Thor, TF4M Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Why should the general listener be punished because of some cheaters. A delay is not necessary; we just need ethical contesters. This is also no worse than contesters who use DX clusters or DX spots do locate DX stations. I'm old fashioned. We shouldn't use any external communications infrastructure when making QSO's. Mike N2MS - Original Message - From: Kostas Stamatis sv1...@otenet.gr To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 15:58:55 - (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Anyone who makes available his sdr without delay, just helps cheaters. We all know some of them who use a sdr receiver to make qsos. Maybe there is no need anymore to learn the calls. Just stop this. A delay of 1min for example is perfect to enjoy all the goods of an sdr receiver without helping cheaters. I don't know if software allows it but i don't think it is difficult. 73 Kostas sv1dpi - Original Message - From: Thorvaldur Stefansson To: Brendan Minish ; Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' hello Brendan, Perhaps this thread is too old, but I only now came across it, sorry if the subject has been beaten to death already. As you may know I have served my Perseus SDR receiver over the internet for almost a year - it never occurred to me that people would use it for cheating purposes. I found the experiment interesting for a variety of technical issues - it also pleased me to allow remote users to experience what Zero Noise level sounds like. Obviously the issues are the same whether a SDR or a regular remote receiver is used for cheating. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Hi Dave, I'm not asking you (as a group I am taking the your usage of us to mean) to believe anything. My personal opinion is that ethics, integrity and honor are individual rather than absolute values. I have no idea what the current DXCC or any other award/contest rules are but if they are violated then that participant should be disqualified; however the OP made no mention of the QSOs using this method being used for credit in any awards program or contest results. So I reiterate my opinion that in the absence of any legal or rule violations the ethics and merit of making a contact using this method, just like using DX helper nets, cluster spots, remote control super stations, QRP/QRO etc. are a matter for the individual to judge for himself. 73 Bob HS0ZIA --- On Sat, 2/12/11, Dave Heil k...@frontiernet.net wrote: From: Dave Heil k...@frontiernet.net Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' To: Bob Kupps n...@yahoo.com Date: Saturday, February 12, 2011, 11:54 AM Bob, Would you have us believe that ethics, integrity and honor are optional? People have been disqualified from the DXCC program for less. Dave Heil K8MN On 2/11/2011 03 21, Bob Kupps wrote: Seems to me like just another step from DX U work em nets and packet cluster spots. Why do we need to have an ethical position on this? Unless this technic is used to gain an advantage in a contest or award program where it is prohibited by the rules then like all activities where no one is being harmed the ethics are up to the individual. If you personally think this activity is improper then just don't allow it on your machine. 73 Bob HS0ZIA --- On Fri, 2/11/11, Brendan Minishei6iz.bren...@gmail.com wrote: From: Brendan Minishei6iz.bren...@gmail.com Subject: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' To: topband@contesting.com Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 3:38 AM Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3436 - Release Date: 02/11/11 ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Thats a great use Herb .. FWIW - I am not a contester or an awards collector but I am a serious dx'er. Technology concerns aside for how the various new things can be abused, I really think the single issue affecting ham radio is poor behaviors. Whether senseless pileup calling, illegal power, QSO hogging and seemingly aggressive, unethical contesting techniques it's like gun control - it's not the guns - its the users.. Sent from my iPad On Feb 11, 2011, at 15:51, Herb Schoenbohm he...@vitelcom.net wrote: On 2/11/2011 12:09 PM, W2PM wrote: Why not just use SKYPE? Could have a packaged service which includes band noise, QRM, etc. Like Dr DX but via SKYPE. QST can do a full tech review. For once it may be meaningful too. Well in fact I douse Skype but in a very different way that is intended to be helpful and not during contests. Here is what I do: I have my RX and NE Beverage on 1821.5 with Skype in Auto Answer. Anyone who calls my Skype gets the RX audio, to test, if they wish, how their signal is being heard here during various propagation conditions. This is a single frequency, single user, courtesy basically to test propagation for the other end to switch TX antennas. It provides no direct help in enabling a contact. At times when I have put it into a wider mode on the QSX frequency of a Dx-pedition to give an idea of the magnitude of callers across 1.5 Khz. The latency of a few seconds is enough to discourage any misuse. It may have had some value, during the PJ entity explosion as propagation here is the same as most of the nearby PJ5,6, and 7. If you can hear yourself in the pileup across 1.5 khz of audio you deserve a medal anyway. If there is a problem with this, I would like to know. Please let us not make the technology good the victim of the bad. Herb, KV4FZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Nope. The rule says *all* transmitters, receivers, and antennas must be in the *same* 500m circle. I guess the circle moves around with mobile stations, but I don't think anyone is worried about those guys. 73, Dick WC1M On Feb 11, 2011, at 6:55 PM, ZR z...@jeremy.mv.com wrote: So does that mean the guy in his Brooklyn hi rise without any gear can operate X number of stations in the US in say the 160M contest and likely win? There is no rule I see about not moving the 500m entity X times just as their is no rule about a cross country trucker operating and submitting a log.. Carl KM1H - Original Message - From: Dick Green WC1M wc1...@gmail.com To: 'Robert McGwier' rwmcgw...@gmail.com; Tree t...@kkn.net Cc: topband@contesting.com Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Your SDR was effectively a remote receiver used by the DX station. Credit for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules governing specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC credit: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the sentence, remote operating points is not defined. Does that include only the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the transmitter and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the second sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly. Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for most CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for the Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers and antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the DX station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver (your SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would not be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and categories. However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the transmitter and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where the station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a transmitter and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the station over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and counts as having been made from Ghana. Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little. 73, Dick WC1M -Original Message- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM To: Tree Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Hi Brendan, This all seems unethical. To me these are bogus QSO's. This is a radio hobby, not a professional business. If the radiocontact isn't possible, so be it. Better luck next time and perhaps even more motivation and fun then. 73 Mark, PA5MW On 10 feb. 2011, at 21:38, Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Brendan EI6IZ Wrote .last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me The last time this subject was discussed on a Reflector, it was suggested that if a long delay were inserted between the SDR's input and output, the device would retain it's intended usefulness for propagation checking but make it useless as a QSO repeater for the Cheaters! Perhaps that should become standard practice? ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
really this is not ethic. so this DX Station think he is doing 160 SSB? If I use this SDR of course I will run Europe easily, also in SSB, but I know that this is not radio, is internet! So finally, will be good to know who is this DX station. 73, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W -Mensaje original- De: topband-boun...@contesting.com [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Brendan Minish Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Febrero de 2011 06:38 p.m. Para: topband@contesting.com Asunto: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Of course it's wrong. Why not take the radio all the way out of it, use Skype or CQ100, and call it radio? I'd be interested to know what the sponsors of the Top Band awards have to say about it. On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:38:27 + Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- R. Kevin Stover AC0H ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
absolutely an ethical violation! in a contest of course most rules forbid it. perhaps that's a different game, with different rules like talking on the telephone. 73/Jon AA1K www.aa1k.us On 2/10/2011 15:38 PM, Brendan Minish wrote: It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Why not just use SKYPE? Could have a packaged service which includes band noise, QRM, etc. Like Dr DX but via SKYPE. QST can do a full tech review. For once it may be meaningful too. Sent from my iPad On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:17, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 16:29 +1300, Greg - ZL3IX wrote: I am also a member of the SDR community (HPSDR) and I have had several disputes with the proponents of remote SDR receivers. I have requested that they put long time delays, say 15s, into the audio path, but they refuse to do so on the grounds that they don't want to limit technical progress for the sake of a few dishonest operators. A few people have suggested a delay BUT I would hate to see this implemented just to manage a problem of a few people who use real-time access to an SDR to 'cheat' at amateur radio award chasing. The majority of users of my SDR have to date listened outside the amateur bands either to the various broadcast bands or to HF Utility traffic of various kinds. Others use the system just to tune around, I myself find it fascinating to hear what 20 or 40m sounds like on the west coast of the states for example Almost without exception the users of the system are people like me who enjoy SWL activities, In my case it's predominantly tropical band broadcast Dxing. We are all fully aware that reception is taking place AT the location of the remote SDR not in our own shacks A 15 second delay would make the system unacceptably laggy and unpleasant to use, this is not a web-sdr, it's remotely controllable (via the internet) SDR that can be freely tuned from 10KHz or so to 30MHz Others have suggested that I should only allow the receiver to be used under my direct supervision, but again this means I must deny the resource to many just because a tiny minority use the system unethically. Let's also not forget that for SWL's in compromised locations with high local noise floor etc that these internet accessible SDR's provide a great opportunity for them to experience reception from a quiet location with good antennas. -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Who among us is surprised? Almost all of the new technology tools (SDR, chatroom, Spectran, etc.) while intriguing and fun to operate, can be used to make QSO's that would not otherwise be made. I personally have no interest in working DX that way. It removes some of the challenge that drew me to Topband in the first place. Sadly, it causes one to look at some achievements on the band with a far more skeptical eye too. Ken K4ZW ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Your SDR was effectively a remote receiver used by the DX station. Credit for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules governing specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC credit: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the sentence, remote operating points is not defined. Does that include only the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the transmitter and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the second sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly. Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for most CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for the Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers and antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the DX station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver (your SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would not be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and categories. However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the transmitter and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where the station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a transmitter and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the station over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and counts as having been made from Ghana. Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little. 73, Dick WC1M -Original Message- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM To: Tree Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
So does that mean the guy in his Brooklyn hi rise without any gear can operate X number of stations in the US in say the 160M contest and likely win? There is no rule I see about not moving the 500m entity X times just as their is no rule about a cross country trucker operating and submitting a log.. Carl KM1H - Original Message - From: Dick Green WC1M wc1...@gmail.com To: 'Robert McGwier' rwmcgw...@gmail.com; Tree t...@kkn.net Cc: topband@contesting.com Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Your SDR was effectively a remote receiver used by the DX station. Credit for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules governing specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC credit: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the sentence, remote operating points is not defined. Does that include only the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the transmitter and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the second sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly. Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for most CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for the Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers and antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the DX station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver (your SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would not be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and categories. However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the transmitter and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where the station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a transmitter and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the station over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and counts as having been made from Ghana. Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little. 73, Dick WC1M -Original Message- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM To: Tree Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
