Here's a perspective, in agreement with the e-mails cited below.
The FCC Rules trump everything.
The ARRL Rules narrow the focus of those rules in order to meet certain
objectives.
Duh. Right?
FCC:
Part 97.1 Subpart A: http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/news/part97/
There are several references to advancing the radio art and the building of
electronics competency of the licensee.
ARRL:
Object: To work as many amateur stations in as many different 2 degrees x 1
degree grid squares as possible using authorized frequencies above 50 MHz.
Foreign stations work W/VE amateurs only.
So...
The format of the signal source is immaterial as long as it is FCC authorized.
There are no mode restrictions placed in the ARRL rules for their VHF+
contests (with the sole exception of the one we're discussing).
Therefore...
What matters is that (1) the signal can be used for communication in some way
AND that (2) it utilizes some sort of electronic scheme in decoding it. That
is "Radio". 1-hz = radio. 470-THz = radio. But only if it is electronically
decoded.
The "electronic decoding" scheme is unlimited. Decode it to any/all of the
following: audible tones, visual indicator, touch stimulator, smell
(hmmm...that could be interesting), etc.
I am in favor or removing the "Coherence" restriction.
Ev, W2EV
---- Original Message ----
From: kf0m <kf0m_list@cox.net>
To: George Sintchak/WA2VNV <wa2vnv@optonline.net>;
VHFcontesting@contesting.com; NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net; Stanford VHF email
Remailer <VHF@w6yx.stanford.edu>; Fred Lass <felasstic@yahoo.com>
Cc: wsvhf@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Fri, December 4, 2009 11:31:04 PM
Subject: Re: [WSVHF] [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was: [VHF] VUAC
Seeks Input]
George I am with you I think the rules should encourage experimentation and
operating not ham string novel or crude types of communication. There will
always be those that bend, skirt, and twist the letter of the rules to their
own self serving advantage and ignore the spirit of the rules.
We will all learn who they are and they will loose credibility even if they
artificially always score at the top of the contest. They may toot their
own horn but the real operators will know who the real top performers are
that operate with integrity. They already exist on all the bands from VLF on
up thru microwave EME.
So keep the rules simple be clear in what the spirit of the rule intends and
if people ant to play silly games running in a close circle with flashlights
so what. If they are willing to stoop to that level, there is nothing to
stop them from just claiming in their log to have driven in circles at the
grid corner when they were really relaxing at starbucks over coffee.
If you make the rules restrictive and complex it won't stop anyone except
the real experimenters who sometimes may do something as simple as keying a
transmitter with a clip lead to send CW with a diode detector and a light
bulb for a reciever.
John Lock
kf0m at arrl.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wsvhf-bounces@mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:wsvhf-bounces@mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of George
> Sintchak/WA2VNV
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 6:29 PM
> To: VHFcontesting@contesting.com; NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net; Stanford VHF
> email Remailer; Fred Lass
> Cc: wsvhf@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [WSVHF] [VHFcontesting] The meaning of coherence [was:
> [VHF] VUAC Seeks Input]
>
>
> My $.02 thoughts (coherent or not).
>
> Laser or LED, coherent or not? Which mode gets the message
> completed for a
> valid contact? Does it really matter? A non-coherent flashlight emitter
> aimed at an electronically amplified voice modulated reflective
> speaker cone
> which can be seem from a 1km distance thru a telescope with a
> photomultiplier amplifier and eye piece photo diode detector connected
> to....... Please read on....
>
> Most of us will use our sense of hearing to decode a message
> using voice or
> CW tones as long as "electronic detection", "electronic amplification" is
> used somewhere in the (receiver?) link. Now, try this if you are
> deaf - just
> put in some earplugs and see how many contest contacts you can make.
> No problem, you say, do it visually, RTTY, text video, blinking LED,
> etc..... Visual is OK - we use our eyes - to see/read the message
> info and
> make the contact. (Yes, I know there are some that can decode
> RTTY in their
> head by sound.) We just decode the message with our "eyes" instead of our
> "ears". Computer (assisted ?) detection (WSJT, PSK31, etc) is OK
> too. Some
> deaf/blind "feel" the speaker cone to decode the CW message, even if QLF
> (look it up).
>
> We can use any of our "senses" to make a valid contact exchange. Does it
> really make a difference whether it's coherent or not? Auditory, Visual,
> Tactile ? The point I wish to make is you still have to make a
> valid contact
> exchange. My reasoning along these lines is that if we (hams) are
> to provide
> emergency communications (backup or otherwise), encourage
> experimentation,
> and increase contest activity, we should use whatever it takes to get the
> message (contact) completed. Viz. The crew in a dark, disabled
> submarine on
> the ocean bottom using a hammer on the hull and the ship using
> sophisticated
> sonar doing a search couldn't care less if it's coherent or not. Also
> remember (1968) the U.S.S. Pueblo captured ship, when commander Bucher
> blinked this eyes using Morse code to send secret pleas for help
> during his
> video filmed confession - a pretty amazing feat that the North Korean
> captors didn't figure out. We got the message!
>
> I realize that the current discussion is about the coherence of
> the emitter
> and the method(s) of detection/distance, but let's not forget the bigger
> picture of what the contest and the communication "art" is all
> about if we
> want to encourage more experimentation and activity to that end. The more
> complicated or restrictive the rules become, the more discouraged will
> "throw in the towel" and leave. Regardless of the "mode" you
> still have to
> make the valid contact exchange. Please make it easy/simple.
> If you read this far, thanks for patience.
>
> Best 73's
> George, WA2VNV, FN30kv
> SLOP, 50-1296
>
______________________________________________________________
WSVHF mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/wsvhf
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:WSVHF@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|