Using hack green - with WebSDR poll

But there is the addition of a substantial infrastructure which is not required for the radio contact.

When I talk with youngsters, potential recruits or polite enquirers on summits or paths the feature that invokes the most positive reaction is the distance covered with so small an amount of kit - at both ends. They are evidently aware that a phone does not talk to another phone - it talks to a complex and expensive system which is what we use when we get the signal via Hack Green and other similar facilities.

It think I could argue that this is a radio communication - WiFi connected laptop - and this is where the current discussion could eventually lead us.

73,
Rod

1 Like

Let us be clear. That is not in the rules. As the rules stand remote stations and remote receivers are neither forbidden or accepted, they are just not mentioned, having not been an available option when the rules were drawn up - hence this discussion.

This is true, Rod, but the need for a substantial infrastructure does not make a web SDR into a repeater. It is a different animal entirely, and as the rules stand it is not forbidden.

As I see it, we have three options with regard to rules regulating chasing via remote receivers and/or remote transceivers:

  1. The laissez-faire option, do nothing and let the situation evolve as it will,

  2. Permit the use of remote stations or receivers but define the conditions, such as in the same entity or within a limiting distance,

  3. Segregate remote users into different honour rolls - this might be done in conjunction with option 2).

One thing that has escaped discussion so far is how the availability of remote stations impacts on activating. As the rules stand the use of remote equipment by an activator is not mentioned. The ultimate light-weight activation could take no more equipment than a mobile phone! I suspect that the very idea would be anathema to activators but it isnā€™t against the rules unless we invoke the catch-all ā€œspirit of the programmeā€.

Disclaimer: I havenā€™t bothered to check.

However - for activators, Iā€™m pretty sure that it is defined somewhere that the activator, and all activating gear, must be within the AZ. If it isnā€™t, then thatā€™s an easy one to add in.

I now have checked. Itā€™s fine. General Rules 3.7.1.4 together with 3.7.1.5 are sufficient for this requirement.

1 Like

3.7.1.5 says that all equipment must be carried to the site. So that means activators cannot use a remote station of any sort. However 3.7.1.4 says only the operator has to be within the AZ.

Yes, I saw that, 3.7.1.4 merely defines the operating position, which is the position of the activator, not his station. 3.7.1.5, ā€œall equipment must be carried to the site by the Activation teamā€ is better but needs to be more specific to counter the argument ā€œI carried my mobile phone to the summitā€. The same goes for 3.7.1.6, ā€œall equipment must be operated from a portable power sourceā€.

There is actually no requirement that the equipment must be in the AZ, only the operator. This opens the possibility of the operator on the summit with a mobile phone controlling a heavy high powered station, perhaps near his car guarded by a companion.

Operating on the lowest bands in some circumstances it could be hard to keep all of the antenna within the AZ (e.g. top-band Ī»/4 chucked over a cliff.)

I think that is debatable.

For remotes, in contrast, the definition is perhaps more tractable. If you transmit with a remote it is under the authority of your transmitting licence. The transmitter is your station in the (UK&CD at least) licence sense, even if in ownership terms it is not yours. We can therefore say there is no 3rd-party station involved in the QSO. This distinguishes remote operation from operation through repeaters or gateways.

But no licence is required nowadays for receive (is this true in all administrations?) so we cannot use this convenient definition for the RX-only case.

ā€œThe spirit of the programmeā€.

Thatā€™s easy enough to understand, and easy enough for MT to make a ruling on, in the extremely rare case that a questionable activation is brought to out attention.

Letā€™s not overthink this.

I think this is crystal clear. All equipment includes the transmitter, receiver and antennas. If they are remote then they have not been carried to the summit. No clarification required.

1 Like

I thought the whole point of the internet was to have endless arguments about trivial matters.

5 Likes

Wasnt the original question about chasers, who could be 1000s of miles/km from the AZ?

Yep. But threads diversify on here. Some more than others.

I think it is important that the activator rules are clear and tied down - and that appears to be the case. The chasers? Well I guess thatā€™s more difficult. You could make them declare where there station is RX & TX, but then you may need to introduce limits as to how often they may change this / move QTH etc. Probably not worth it and best left to participantsā€™ themselves to remain within the spirit of the programme.

Iā€™m working in Grimsby on Saturday if you fancy meeting up for a pint?

I agree that tracking the number of times someone moves home is thwart with issues and to potentially muddy the waters further, isnā€™t an S2S, where by definition each activator is a chaser of the other, a case where the chaser is all over the map (literally)?

Yes, but because each chaser is also an activator, they have all their equipment - RX & TX & antenna - with them there in the AZ - and indeed carried it there themselves.

Going to Portugal Saturday ā€¦ No radio.

1 Like

It has not escaped discussion, Brian. As I mentioned earlier, if an activator is audible to the chaser only via the SDR receiver, then the activator is using the Web-SDR, just as much as the chaser is. In such circumstances, the activator is not working the chaser; he is working the Web-SDR. It is not a point-to-point two-way radio contact.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

Well, let us initiate a discussion. As I see it the activator is just transmitting and receiving, he is taking no special steps to access the SDR receiver and unless told by the chaser that a web SDR is involved then he cannot know that this is happening. Meanwhile, since the use of a web SDR is not currently against the rules the chaser has no obligation to tell the activator. Equally, the activator has no way of knowing if the chaser is using a full remote station. All the activator is likely to know is that he exchanged reports with another station. I see no problem for the activator with this.

Iā€™m following the discussion with interest, and have no strong view now, except to agree that we might be putting a lot of time into solving an almost non existent problem.

To play devilā€™s advocate for a moment; diversity reception, or in the case of a remote receiver, site diversity reception, is not a new idea, and has long been used in radio communications.
Is that what some are seeking to ban in the context of SOTA?

HI,

Just some possum baiting thoughts on SOTA Remotes.

#1 Repeaters have been excluded ā€“ Iā€™m guessing the rationale was something like the notion they used a means not of the operators making to extend their range. It was an ā€œunnaturalā€ way of making contact. The bias of simplex and weak signal operators may have had something to do with this. Most activities in which points are scored for contacts exclude repeaters, in part to stop them being clogged up. I am neutral about the exclusion given that the activator has climbed the peak and met all other requirements.

#2 Satellites were allowed even though they are a repeater system. Not sure of the rationale here. Certainly the weak signal community accepted them and they take a bit more effort to use than a standard FM repeater. My attitude is that they are repeaters but need not be excluded if the activator meets the rest of the SOTA Rules.

#3 If someone sets up a remote station and is the sole user of that station and it has a unique call sign and if it is within 160 km of the operatorā€™s normal home station, then Iā€™m comfortable with that being used to chase. Note the 3 requirements.

#4 If a financial, registered Club member uses a remote station set up by the club and it has a unique call sign and is within 160 km of the operators normal home QTH, then Iā€™m comfortable with that being used to chase. Note the 3 requirements.

#4 By extension if a chaser transmits from home but uses any remote receiving station to receive the activator it should be a valid SOTA contact if the remote receiver is within 160 km of the chaserā€™s QTH.

#5 I would not be happy with an activator allowing others to remotely use his mountain top station and claim an activation.

#6 I would not be happy with the use of a remote station or receiver to score chaser points if it were more than 160 km from the chasers normal station QTH.

Heading back into my cave.

73
Ron
VK3AFW

3 Likes

Why ā€œwithin 160kmā€ Ron? That seems to be a rather arbitrary requirement.

My tuppence for what itā€™s worthā€¦
Rules should be:
Comprehensible
Fair
Enforcible/enforced

The key here is that SOTA is a personal challenge (neither a contest nor a competition). ā€œCheatingā€ therefore becomes a bit pointless (a bit like cheating at a game of patience!). There are some good reasons already mentioned why some amateurs may choose to use remote transmitter(s)/receiver(s). Under some circumstances I think a case could be argued for such operating (chasing) to be within the spirit of SOTA. For those who choose to use the technology to ā€œgain an unfair advantageā€ - congratulations give yourselves a gold medalā€¦ along with those who ā€œcheatā€ by daring to have better antennae/QTH/power etc than the rest of us.

I think ā€œvalueā€ is related to effort. If something becomes too easy it is devalued. For SOTA to retain its attraction to me it needs to be more difficult than simply making a phone call. Part of the fun (and most of the frustration) is the uncertainty surrounding every activation!

Now, how do I get my wife to agree to that antennae farm in her garden?

Edit 100/100 :boom::boom::boom::grin:

1 Like