Brilliant! I like this idea.
John KK9A
To:
Subject:Re: Topband: Additional Comments on Impact of Remote RX Systems
From: "Ed Sawyer"
Reply-to: sawye...@earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 12:18:14 -0400
I agree with John's (KK9A) commentary but not nece
I agree with John's (KK9A) commentary but not necessarily that it needs a
new category. Just add it to the assisted category. Leave the unassisted
category as is. Assisted is an evolving slippery slope anyway and more of
these things will emerge - no doubt. Assisted is really "technology and
in
only be competing against stations with similar
restrictions.
John KK9A
To: John Crovelli , Topband
Subject:Re: Topband: Additional Comments on Impact of Remote RX Systems
From: Victor Goncharsky
Reply-to: Victor Goncharsky
Hi John,
I vote for solution B
&g
Hi John,
I vote for solution B
>B. Remote RX systems must be no more than 100 km from the TX antenna
>location.
>
>Thanks again for your interest in this subject and your thoughtful comments.
>Regards,
>John, W2GD
>
>
>_
>Topband Reflecto
Hello John et al,
Nice summary.
As someone who is certainly new to contesting but not to chasing DX on 160
meters, here are my thoughts regarding remote receivers.
Yes, Topband is hard! If it was easy, everyone would do it and those of us
who have achieved numbers over 300 countries worked woul
This has been a great discussion.nearly 50 posts on the remote RX question
this weeknice job everyone.we even managed to keep it fairly 'civil'.
I went back and read all of your posts a second time, and selected some of the
observations and suggestions for this summary discussion wh
