Take a look at radiomarine.org to see how remote receivers were implemented commercially more than 40 years ago. It's easier now, but remote receiving isn't a new thing.
For that matter, neither are "Band Scopes," a.k.a. Spectrum Analyzers. My ancient HP-141T, ca 1974, even has a tracking generator that shows the marker frequency on a friendly nixie tube display. -Jeff, W0ODS >________________________________ > From: Greg - ZL3IX <zl...@inet.net.nz> >To: topband@contesting.com >Sent: >Subject: Re: Topband: [CQ-Contest] Stew Perry Streaming Audio > > >Hi Steve, > >I'm afraid that if remote receivers were not allowed, I would not be >taking part. That is the only way that I can do ham radio nowadays, due >to planning restrictions. I can assure you that, although the >technologies are different from those used in the old days, getting a >remote station to work properly, requires just as much design skill and >ingenuity as the old timers used to set up their stations. > >73, Greg, ZL3IX > >On 2013-12-29 08:39 a.m., Steve London wrote: >> Rule 6 of the Stew Perry is a joke in so many ways. >> >> "enjoy the contest the way we did back when Stew Perry was around" >> >> contradicted by: >> >> "We do realize band scopes can show that someone is on 1829.3 - but >> since they don't tell you who is actually there, that is okay." >> >> "Therefore, remote receivers are okay as long as they are not more >> than 100 kM from your transmitter site." >> >> How many remote receivers and band scopes did W1BB use ? >> >> 73, >> Steve, N2IC >> >> On 12/28/2013 10:59 AM, Stan Stockton wrote: >>> Hans, >>> >>> First - I know there was no il-intent. Others have done it without >>> public complaints. >>> >>> However, ask yourself how fair it would be for one of the competitors >>> in WRTC to be allowed to announce to the world that their callsign >>> (not operators calls) would be streaming live audio during the IARU >>> next year. Is there a difference? Would it be a stretch to see an >>> advantage over the others ? How is that different? >>> >>> Rules say "Boy and his radio" (!) and also "any communication with >>> humans other than exchanges that take place over the air can be >>> considered assistance". Example of exception for asking wife for >>> sandwich is given. >>> >>> Assuming a sidetone of some sort is audible, would it be any >>> different if the operator were allowed to call people on the phone >>> (one way communication) to tell them he hears them and what report he >>> is sending? I can't see any difference other than a different, >>> non-radio means of communicating. >>> >>> I think we have all gotten to the point of mixing up in our own heads >>> what is radio and what is not. The Internet is a great thing and can >>> be used in conjunction with ham radio to add enjoyment. However, >>> listening to audio via Internet or telephone is not radio. >>> >>> Recording the entire contest with side tone and posting it for >>> everyone to listen to after the contest is over is a fine idea. >>> >>> With no malice but a very strong opinion... >>> >>> 73...Stan, K5GO >>> >>> Sent from Stan's IPhone >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 28, 2013, at 11:11 AM, "Radio K0HB"<kzer...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> What a shame that you've abandoned the idea. I'm not 160-equipped >>>> in my RV but it would have been fun to listen in on the action, and >>>> it's a stretch to see this as an advantage over other competitors. >>>> >>>> 73, de Hans, K0HB/K7 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Eric NO3M<n...@no3m.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Since there seems to be too much concern over this, though no ill >>>>> intent >>>>> was intended, audio will not be broadcast. >>>>> >>>>> GL / 73 Eric NO3M >>>>> >>>>> On 12/28/2013 06:23 AM, Stan Stockton wrote: >>>>>> Eric, >>>>>> >>>>>> You made it clear what you were doing, and I am quite sure Clive >>>>>> understood. I think the logic behind his question has to do with >>>>>> whether it is within the spirit of the contest - especially this >>>>>> one. Let's say, as a result of the announcement or advertisement , >>>>>> 15 DX stations and 25 USA stations who are not even going to send >>>>>> in their log called you, just for fun and the novelty of it, so >>>>>> they could listen to their own signal at your end via Internet. >>>>>> >>>>>> What if some have enough QRM or QRN that they could only copy >>>>>> whether you came back to them by listening via internet? Fair to >>>>>> your competitors? >>>>>> >>>>>> It is cool, but I've always had a problem with this, regardless of >>>>>> what contest. >>>>>> >>>>>> 73...Stan, K5GO >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPad >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list >>>>> cq-cont...@contesting.com >>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CQ-Contest mailing list >>> cq-cont...@contesting.com >>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest >>> >> _________________ >> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > >> >> > >_________________ >Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband