At 10:11 AM 9/15/2007, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
We have this sort of discussion every year before field day. ARRL permits contacts VIA the ISS for credit as a satellite but does not count contacts TO the ISS crew for credit (though many are made just for fun).
Since the ISS is a unique situation (currently being the only manned satellite with amateur radio gear), the ARRL has some conflicting rules to deal with. It is a satellite so contacts via it should be legitimate. It is a manned craft not in contact with the Earth so it does not count for contacts just like an aeronautical mobile contact does not count.
I personally do not think having the ISS declared a DXCC entity is a good idea. The crew would be overwhelmed when on and the ISS is not a permanent installation.
On the other hand, what do you think the ARRL will do with manned amateur radio locations on the moon?
Kenneth - N5VHO
Ken,
In my opinion astronaut contacts at ISS should be regarded as satellite contacts. But then ISS and shuttle contacts are so unique they deserve their own recognition and a QSL from them is certainly one. I suppose a WWAS (worked all space shuttles) or WAA (worked all astronauts) might be considered? But we already had a space-race so do not need to repeat that with ham contacts :-)
Regarding Moon contacts I would suppose the Moon would be set up with grids like earth, so each grid would suffice (exploration of the lunar landscape will probably dictate some demarcation scheme). I would guess that off-world radio contacts would not be included into the DXCC for the same reason as ISS. But as the Moon and planets are populated an ETDXCC would evolve. Of course this already exists as an award from the SETI-League.
73, Ed - KL7UW ====================================== BP40IQ 50-MHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801, 4x-xpol-20, 185w DUBUS Magazine USA Rep [email protected] ======================================
Ed Cole wrote:
an ETDXCC would evolve. Of course this already exists as
an award from the SETI-League.
Thanks for the plug, Ed. For those not familiar with ETCC, see www.setileague.org/awards/etcc.htm.
73 from Berlin, Paul N6TX
Just throwing this out there, but would the ARRL, (or any other governing body for that matter), have any jurisdiction or authority on the moon?
From: Edward Cole [email protected] To: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" [email protected], "John P. Toscano" [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: [fieldops] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane? Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 03:28:07 -0800
At 10:11 AM 9/15/2007, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
We have this sort of discussion every year before field day. ARRL permits contacts VIA the ISS for credit as a satellite but does not count contacts TO the ISS crew for credit (though many are made just for
fun).
Since the ISS is a unique situation (currently being the only manned satellite with amateur radio gear), the ARRL has some conflicting rules to deal with. It is a satellite so contacts via it should be legitimate. It is a manned craft not in contact with the Earth so it does not count for contacts just like an aeronautical mobile contact does not count.
I personally do not think having the ISS declared a DXCC entity is a good idea. The crew would be overwhelmed when on and the ISS is not a permanent installation.
On the other hand, what do you think the ARRL will do with manned amateur radio locations on the moon?
Kenneth - N5VHO
Ken,
In my opinion astronaut contacts at ISS should be regarded as satellite contacts. But then ISS and shuttle contacts are so unique they deserve their own recognition and a QSL from them is certainly one. I suppose a WWAS (worked all space shuttles) or WAA (worked all astronauts) might be considered? But we already had a space-race so do not need to repeat that with ham contacts :-)
Regarding Moon contacts I would suppose the Moon would be set up with grids like earth, so each grid would suffice (exploration of the lunar landscape will probably dictate some demarcation scheme). I would guess that off-world radio contacts would not be included into the DXCC for the same reason as ISS. But as the Moon and planets are populated an ETDXCC would evolve. Of course this already exists as an award from the SETI-League.
73, Ed - KL7UW ====================================== BP40IQ 50-MHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801, 4x-xpol-20, 185w DUBUS Magazine USA Rep [email protected] ======================================
Fieldops mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA [email protected] http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/fieldops
As long as it remains the case that the Moon has no useful natural resources that can be profitably extracted and returned to Earth then all nations will be quite happy with the status quo which is that no single nation has jurisdiction over the Moon.
With regard to DXCC the ARRL can invent any DXCC entity it wishes - on the Earth or elsewhere.
While the number of humans in space remains so few it is unlikely they would create DXCC entities on the Moon or any other orbiting satellite such as ISS. It would just result in the Astronauts being jammed off the air by hams desperate for another DXCC entity.
Realistically you're not going to see tens of thousands of Humans living outside of Earth for a millenium or more so the question is academic, unless of course a few decades from now some enterprising DXpeditioners hire a tourist space rocket flight for a week long DX-pedition in space ???
73 Trevor M5AKA
--- Mike SCOTT [email protected] wrote:
Just throwing this out there, but would the ARRL, (or any other governing body for that matter), have any jurisdiction or authority on the moon?
From: Edward Cole [email protected] To: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" [email protected], "John P. Toscano" [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: [fieldops] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane? Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 03:28:07 -0800
At 10:11 AM 9/15/2007, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
We have this sort of discussion every year before field day. ARRL permits contacts VIA the ISS for credit as a satellite but does not count contacts TO the ISS crew for credit (though many are made just for
fun).
Since the ISS is a unique situation (currently being the only manned satellite with amateur radio gear), the ARRL has some conflicting rules to deal with. It is a satellite so contacts via it should be legitimate. It is a manned craft not in contact with the Earth so it does not count for contacts just like an aeronautical mobile contact does not count.
I personally do not think having the ISS declared a DXCC entity is a good idea. The crew would be overwhelmed when on and the ISS is not a permanent installation.
On the other hand, what do you think the ARRL will do with manned amateur radio locations on the moon?
Kenneth - N5VHO
Ken,
In my opinion astronaut contacts at ISS should be regarded as satellite contacts. But then ISS and shuttle contacts are so unique they deserve their own recognition and a QSL from them is certainly one. I suppose a WWAS (worked all space shuttles) or WAA (worked all astronauts) might be considered? But we already had a space-race so do not need to repeat that with ham contacts :-)
Regarding Moon contacts I would suppose the Moon would be set up with grids like earth, so each grid would suffice (exploration of the lunar landscape will probably dictate some demarcation scheme). I would guess that off-world radio contacts would not be included into the DXCC for the same reason as ISS. But as the Moon and planets are populated an ETDXCC would evolve. Of course this already exists as an award from the SETI-League.
73, Ed - KL7UW ====================================== BP40IQ 50-MHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801, 4x-xpol-20, 185w DUBUS Magazine USA Rep [email protected] ======================================
Fieldops mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA [email protected] http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/fieldops
Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
___________________________________________________________ Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html
The number of humans really doesn't explain DXCC designation. Take Peter I Island for instance. In fact, their last slogan was that more people have been in space than have set foot on Peter Island.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Trevor Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 4:03 PM To: AMSAT BB Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: [fieldops] Re: Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane?
As long as it remains the case that the Moon has no useful natural resources that can be profitably extracted and returned to Earth then all nations will be quite happy with the status quo which is that no single nation has jurisdiction over the Moon.
With regard to DXCC the ARRL can invent any DXCC entity it wishes - on the Earth or elsewhere.
While the number of humans in space remains so few it is unlikely they would create DXCC entities on the Moon or any other orbiting satellite such as ISS. It would just result in the Astronauts being jammed off the air by hams desperate for another DXCC entity.
Realistically you're not going to see tens of thousands of Humans living outside of Earth for a millenium or more so the question is academic, unless of course a few decades from now some enterprising DXpeditioners hire a tourist space rocket flight for a week long DX-pedition in space ???
73 Trevor M5AKA
--- Mike SCOTT [email protected] wrote:
Just throwing this out there, but would the ARRL, (or any other governing body for that matter), have any jurisdiction or authority on
the moon?
From: Edward Cole [email protected] To: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" [email protected],
"John P. Toscano" [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: [fieldops] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: ISS a Satellite or an
airplane?
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 03:28:07 -0800
At 10:11 AM 9/15/2007, Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
We have this sort of discussion every year before field day. ARRL permits contacts VIA the ISS for credit as a satellite but does not
count contacts TO the ISS crew for credit (though many are made just for
fun).
Since the ISS is a unique situation (currently being the only manned satellite with amateur radio gear), the ARRL has some conflicting rules to deal with. It is a satellite so contacts via it should be legitimate. It is a manned craft not in contact with the Earth so it does not count for contacts just like an aeronautical mobile contact does not count.
I personally do not think having the ISS declared a DXCC entity is a good idea. The crew would be overwhelmed when on and the ISS is not a permanent installation.
On the other hand, what do you think the ARRL will do with manned amateur radio locations on the moon?
Kenneth - N5VHO
Ken,
In my opinion astronaut contacts at ISS should be regarded as satellite contacts. But then ISS and shuttle contacts are so unique they deserve their own recognition and a QSL from them is certainly one. I suppose a WWAS (worked all space shuttles) or WAA (worked all astronauts) might be considered? But we already had a space-race so do not need to repeat that with ham contacts :-)
Regarding Moon contacts I would suppose the Moon would be set up with
grids like earth, so each grid would suffice (exploration of the lunar landscape will probably dictate some demarcation scheme). I would guess that off-world radio contacts would not be included into the DXCC for the same reason as ISS. But as the Moon and planets are
populated an ETDXCC would evolve. Of course this already exists as an award from the SETI-League.
73, Ed - KL7UW ====================================== BP40IQ 50-MHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801, 4x-xpol-20, 185w DUBUS Magazine USA Rep [email protected] ======================================
Fieldops mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA [email protected] http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/fieldops
Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the
author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
___________________________________________________________ Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (5)
-
Edward Cole -
Mike SCOTT -
Prof. H. Paul Shuch -
Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] -
Trevor