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

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



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 <kl7uw@acsalaska.net>
>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?
>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 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