[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: [fieldops] Re: Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane?



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
-- 

H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D.,       Chief Engineer
Microcomm Consulting     +1 (570) 494-2299
121 Florence Drive, Cogan Station PA 17728
paul@microcomm.net    http://microcomm.net

----------
This document may contain proprietary information, intellectual property, trade names, and logos which may be confidential to Microcomm Consulting.  Dissemination for any purpose of any part of the data contained herein without specific prior written authorization from Microcomm Consulting is hereby prohibited. 
  

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@acsalaska.net>

Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 03:28:07 
To:"Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" <kenneth.g.ransom@nasa.gov>,"John P. Toscano" <tosca005@tc.umn.edu>
Cc:fieldops@amsat.org, amsat-bb@amsat.org
Subject: [fieldops] Re: [amsat-bb] Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane?


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 dubususa@hotmail.com
====================================== 

_______________________________________________
Fieldops mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
Fieldops@amsat.org
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/fieldops


_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home