[amsat-bb] Re: [fieldops] Re: Re: ISS a Satellite or an airplane?
m5aka at yahoo.co.uk
Mon Sep 17 14:02:42 PDT 2007
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 <mikesco at sympatico.ca> 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 <kl7uw at acsalaska.net>
> >To: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" <kenneth.g.ransom at nasa.gov>,
> >"John P. Toscano" <tosca005 at tc.umn.edu>
> >CC: fieldops at amsat.org, amsat-bb at 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
> > >
> > >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
> >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.
> >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 at hotmail.com
> >Fieldops mailing list courtesy of AMSAT-NA
> >Fieldops at amsat.org
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at 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
Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html
More information about the AMSAT-BB