Firstly I’m not really sure whether this is the correct tag for the post, but I think it kind of fits.
When my wife and I were in Hawaii last December I saw a spot for someone on a summit or in a park also on Oahu while in our hotel. I quickly hopped on my iPad and remoted back into my Virginia station where I thought it would be great fun to chase the other guy from Virginia, but while actually sitting in the hotel room in Waikiki.
Anyway, suddenly on Saturday while hiking to the summit of 2810 W4V/HB031 , and thinking about the fact that I have a pretty awesome remoteable station that doesn’t actually need much internet bandwidth to operate I had a crazy thought: Anna (my wife,) KN4DWZ doesn’t really operate much, but she could chase me, from home, while actually being with me on the summit. She then said something that really blew my mind. I guess I was thinking out loud and she heard me. She could activate the summit gear, and then I could operate the remote station to Chase her while we are both physically located on the summit. Ok, well, that’s some mind-bending stuff, but I kind of feel like it would trivialize getting completes, and almost make it seem like cheating. I can’t find anything in the rules re: remote stations, obviously the rules for activating say that all equipment needs to be in the activation zone. There’s also a rule that QSOs with Others within the same activation zone don’t count, but in this case that person would be driving the remote station which could be hundreds of miles away, in any case, the remote chaser could always move out of the activation zone.
So group… I’m curious of your thoughts on this. Or maybe a clarification on the rules.
My interpretation on this would be the same as when several operators want to work each other on a summit.
With two operators, the chaser needs to be physically under the level of the activation zone boundary. How the chaser transmits is not relevant (remote or local). Then the two operators switch positions, and not only does each get two contacts but also (if 2 more contacts can be found) two “completes”
Mine would be the opposite to Ed (with the greatest of respect).
Your wife is working you from a station which is x number of miles away. The success of the chase depends on the distance, antenna, power, band, skip and band conditions at the home station.
As far as I am aware, there is nothing in the rules to prevent this.
You can operate a remote station from anywhere—whether you’re on a train, at the supermarket, or even on a summit—and in doing so, claim chaser points or even “completes.”
If both parties are on the summit, it is effectively the same as two operators logging a VHF contact where one is within the activation zone (AZ) and the other is outside of it.
Personally, however, I don’t find this particularly sporting or ethical.
That part of the rules is in the Activator/Rules for a Valid Expedition section, so I’m not sure it would apply to whoever is chasing here since chasers are addressed in 3.8. We would probably need a formal interpretation from the MT
Not really, you still have to make the effort to activate the summit at some point which (here in the uk at least) is the harder part of gaining completes
This is where you get into the “Is the station where the person is or where equipment is?”
The equipment could be in many different places, and if using the internet to connect (which it sounds like) could literrally be anywhere on the planet including inside the activation zone that you are currently operating from (a part of it anyway will be).
I like to reduce the problem to the ridiculous. I have 2 handhelds, one with a bluetooth microphone and I leave it just out side the activation zone and take myself and the 2nd handheld into the activation zone. If its where the equipment is placed then logic says I can chase myself, but this is obviously ridiculous .
. So from that perspective, I would say its where the person is that counts.
For situations such as this, its not an issue, where it becomes an issue is for distance based challenges (such as the current VHF/UHF challenge).
These are my personal views, and if remote stations were to be excluded, that would be a whole minefield. For instance, is the IC-905 a remote station?
So for chasing purposes, my view is that it is where the person is that matters.
As a member of the MT who also took part in writing that version of the GR, that would be my interpretation. As I see it, both operators are both chaser and activator. It wasn’t a problem back then, but when the next revision of the GR takes place it will have to be discussed and a new rule written.
