Software Defined Radio-Cheating??

Discussion in 'On the Road' started by KF5UMC, Feb 5, 2017.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: L-MFJ
  1. KV6O

    KV6O Ham Member QRZ Page

    Your entire post was:

    I was just going off what you posted. No matter! :D

  2. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Agreed. ;)
  3. K8INA

    K8INA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I guess the term "cheating" has been redefined.... as a quick example, I was listening to one of the nets the other morning and Station A was calling Station B over and over. Finally the Net Control asked if anyone could "relay". Station C entered the scene and proceeded to pass the into back and forth between the other two stations. It was then announced that was was indeed a "CONTACT" between Stations A & B. I mean, really? They never actually talked to one another but it was a CONTACT? I appreciate the relay portion, after all, that is what started the ARRL, BUT, to consider it a contact? While not a "competition" the exchange could then be counted on as a "CONTACT" for any of the awards (DXCC, WAS, Etc). The fellows who actually did talk to the other stations to win their award should feel cheated by those who made RELAY contacts. So, I guess cheating is just semantics after all......
  4. M0MOG

    M0MOG Ham Member QRZ Page


    I run an ex-NATO telex re-broadcast station - based upon the Unimog 404 and, take part once-a-month in the VMARS AM net , operating from a different location around our area each time. Following the net, I usually fire-up the teleprinter equipment and use websdr as a means to monitor my transmissions over Europe and beyond. Frankly, it has transformed my hobby, allowing me to broadcast and get a signal check 24/7. Whilst it does not of course replace a human contact (!) it allows me to continue my hobby even when there is no-one else on-air (which sadly seems increasingly to be the case for mechanical teleprinters on HF).

    Cheating.....come on ! If its a choice between being able to use my kit and not, I know which one I chose :)

    Thats my 2-cents worth.....


    Steve (mike zero mike oscar golf )
  5. KO6WB

    KO6WB Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    There are instances where a remote SDR can be very handy.
    For net operations there is usually one or more stations that are just in the noise, at least that's what the net control hears.
    Listening on one or two remote SDR receivers can greatly aid in making the contact. These are not folks that are usually paper chasers, so it returns the enjoyment of amateur radio to those folks.
    Then there is the case where a certain location has a very high noise level. The SDR is usually some distance away from that noise. Again, by listening to the SDR the amateur can enjoy his transmitting portion of their setup.
    While it's true the afflicted amateur, the one with a high noise problem, should be seeking out where the noise is coming from and eliminate it. In the mean time, the SDR is a valued crutch.
    I have noted the SDR can, themselves, be hampered by local noise and sometimes spurious reception of signals that just aren't there. It's amusing to state the least.
    Using the SDR for chasing paper is, in my opinion, not a valid use of the SDR. That to me would be unfair.
    The above refers only to receiving sites. This posting has nothing to do with those that use a remote station for both transmit and receive. It is still within the reasonable use of such stations as a temporary aide at times when your own station is incapable of operations.

    Have fun
  6. N2EY

    N2EY Ham Member QRZ Page

    In the scenario you describe, Station A and Station B did not have a contact. If either station were to claim that exchange of information for WAS, WAC, DXCC, etc. - that would be cheating.

Share This Page