October 2010 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

FW: [arrl-odv:19409] PJs and DXCC
by Jim Weaver K8JE 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Dave, I've not attempted to recheck Joe's math'; however, his question was addressed in Dave Sumner's message, below. Note par. 3. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040; Tel. 513-459-1661 ARRL, The national organization for Amateur Radio _____ From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:38 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:19409] PJs and DXCC Shortly there will be an announcement that the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles has resulted, in addition to the deletion of the two Netherlands Antilles entities announced earlier, in four new DXCC entities effective 0400 UTC 10 October 2010: (1) Curacao, (2) St. Maarten, (3) Saba & St. Eustatius, and (4) Bonaire. The announcement will not include the following additional background, which may be useful to you if you're asked. Curacao and St. Maarten are added by virtue of their appearance on the U.S. Department of State list of "Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty" <http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/10543.htm> http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/10543.htm as Political Entities under Section II, Rule 1.c) of the DXCC Rules. The two other new entities, Saba & St. Eustatius and Bonaire, are added as Geographic Separation Entities under Section II, Rule 2.b)ii) of the DXCC Rules. While some have questioned whether the distance between Bonaire and the northern islands is 800 km, multiple tests of the distance using a WGS84-equipped calculator and other calculators and charts show the required minimum separation of 800km. Prior to the appearance of the revised State Department list there was some uncertainty as to whether Bonaire, Saba, and St. Eustatius also would be added to the list, each with its own local administrative center. Had that occurred there would have been five new entities rather than four. Confirmations for these new entities will be accepted for DXCC credit beginning 1 January 2011. 73, Dave Sumner, K1ZZ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.862 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3193 - Release Date: 10/13/10 02:34:00

2 1

RE: [arrl-odv:19411] RE: [arrl-odv:19410] W4TV
by Greg Sarratt 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Dave, Send the data and information relating to the multiple test and I will answer his concerns. " While some have questioned whether the distance between Bonaire and the northern islands is 800 km, multiple tests of the distance using a WGS84-equipped calculator and other calculators and charts show the required minimum separation of 800km." Thanks, 73, Greg Sarratt, W4OZK www.southeastern.arrl.org From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 7:55 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:19411] RE: [arrl-odv:19410] W4TV Dave, Joe's earlier comments on this subject were the reason for my backgrounder earlier today. Dave K1ZZ _____ From: David A. Norris [mailto:k5uz@suddenlink.net] Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 1:46 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:19410] W4TV Would anyone care to check Joe's math??? 73 ES DX David A. Norris, K5UZ Vice Director, Delta Div. Ladies and Gentlemen, I call your attention to this release by the "DXCC Desk" today and urge you to become immediately involved to stop this blatant disregard of the DXCC rules. Under the current rules, Bonaire can not qualify as a separate "geographic separation entity" because the separation between Saba and Bonaire is less than the required 800 km when calculated using WGS84 (more accurate than a simple spherical earth or "great circle method" calculation). Specifically when calculated using these endpoints For Saba ..... 17 36 56.63 N 63 15 06.12 W For Bonaire .. 12 13 15.90 N 68 11 49.53 W The WGS84 calculation shows 799.609 km (496.854 mi) The great circle method shows 801.088 km (497.773 mi) See http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/distance.html for both calculations. In any case, the disagreement between calculation methods is sufficient to exclude Bonaire from the DXCC list as it does not *unambiguously* meet the qualifications as a "geographic separation entity." Please, enforce a respect for the DXCC rules as most recently modified. "Overlooking" inconvenient facts will inevitably place the DXCC program on the path to another "Baldwin's Reef" as political considerations and personal preferences take precedence over the rules. Your failure to put a stop to this blatant disregard for the rules can represent a serious threat to the integrity of the program. 73, ... Joe, W4TV

1 0

[arrl-odv:19411] RE: [arrl-odv:19410] W4TV
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Dave, Joe's earlier comments on this subject were the reason for my backgrounder earlier today. Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: David A. Norris [mailto:k5uz@suddenlink.net] Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 1:46 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:19410] W4TV Would anyone care to check Joe's math??? 73 ES DX David A. Norris, K5UZ Vice Director, Delta Div. Ladies and Gentlemen, I call your attention to this release by the "DXCC Desk" today and urge you to become immediately involved to stop this blatant disregard of the DXCC rules. Under the current rules, Bonaire can not qualify as a separate "geographic separation entity" because the separation between Saba and Bonaire is less than the required 800 km when calculated using WGS84 (more accurate than a simple spherical earth or "great circle method" calculation). Specifically when calculated using these endpoints For Saba ..... 17 36 56.63 N 63 15 06.12 W For Bonaire .. 12 13 15.90 N 68 11 49.53 W The WGS84 calculation shows 799.609 km (496.854 mi) The great circle method shows 801.088 km (497.773 mi) See http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/distance.html for both calculations. In any case, the disagreement between calculation methods is sufficient to exclude Bonaire from the DXCC list as it does not *unambiguously* meet the qualifications as a "geographic separation entity." Please, enforce a respect for the DXCC rules as most recently modified. "Overlooking" inconvenient facts will inevitably place the DXCC program on the path to another "Baldwin's Reef" as political considerations and personal preferences take precedence over the rules. Your failure to put a stop to this blatant disregard for the rules can represent a serious threat to the integrity of the program. 73, ... Joe, W4TV

1 0

[arrl-odv:19410] W4TV
by David A. Norris 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

Would anyone care to check Joe's math??? 73 ES DX David A. Norris, K5UZ Vice Director, Delta Div. Ladies and Gentlemen, I call your attention to this release by the "DXCC Desk" today and urge you to become immediately involved to stop this blatant disregard of the DXCC rules. Under the current rules, Bonaire can not qualify as a separate "geographic separation entity" because the separation between Saba and Bonaire is less than the required 800 km when calculated using WGS84 (more accurate than a simple spherical earth or "great circle method" calculation). Specifically when calculated using these endpoints For Saba ..... 17 36 56.63 N 63 15 06.12 W For Bonaire .. 12 13 15.90 N 68 11 49.53 W The WGS84 calculation shows 799.609 km (496.854 mi) The great circle method shows 801.088 km (497.773 mi) See http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/distance.html for both calculations. In any case, the disagreement between calculation methods is sufficient to exclude Bonaire from the DXCC list as it does not *unambiguously* meet the qualifications as a "geographic separation entity." Please, enforce a respect for the DXCC rules as most recently modified. "Overlooking" inconvenient facts will inevitably place the DXCC program on the path to another "Baldwin's Reef" as political considerations and personal preferences take precedence over the rules. Your failure to put a stop to this blatant disregard for the rules can represent a serious threat to the integrity of the program. 73, ... Joe, W4TV

1 0

[arrl-odv:19409] PJs and DXCC
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 13 Oct '10

13 Oct '10

Shortly there will be an announcement that the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles has resulted, in addition to the deletion of the two Netherlands Antilles entities announced earlier, in four new DXCC entities effective 0400 UTC 10 October 2010: (1) Curacao, (2) St. Maarten, (3) Saba & St. Eustatius, and (4) Bonaire. The announcement will not include the following additional background, which may be useful to you if you're asked. Curacao and St. Maarten are added by virtue of their appearance on the U.S. Department of State list of "Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty" http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/10543.htm as Political Entities under Section II, Rule 1.c) of the DXCC Rules. The two other new entities, Saba & St. Eustatius and Bonaire, are added as Geographic Separation Entities under Section II, Rule 2.b)ii) of the DXCC Rules. While some have questioned whether the distance between Bonaire and the northern islands is 800 km, multiple tests of the distance using a WGS84-equipped calculator and other calculators and charts show the required minimum separation of 800km. Prior to the appearance of the revised State Department list there was some uncertainty as to whether Bonaire, Saba, and St. Eustatius also would be added to the list, each with its own local administrative center. Had that occurred there would have been five new entities rather than four. Confirmations for these new entities will be accepted for DXCC credit beginning 1 January 2011. 73, Dave Sumner, K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:19408] IN-News
by Kustosik, Lisa, KA1UFZ 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

<<100610.doc>> IN-Newsletter <<Microsoft Word Picture>> Vol. 33, No. 40 October 6, 2010 -- Covers the period September 26-October 2. Upcoming Meetings and Events Executive Committee Meeting October 23 @ 9:00am in St. Louis, MO Programs & Services Committee: November 13 @ 8:30am - ARRL HQ Ballot Counting for Director/Vice Director Elections November 19 in Newington, CT Administration &Finance Committee November 20 @ 8:30am - ARRL HQ Technical Relations Reported by Brennan Price, N4QX The 2010 USTTI Amateur Radio Administration Course, taught by an ARRL staff team led by CTO Brennan Price, N4QX, and managed by Assistant to the CEO and Meeting Planner Lisa Kustosik, KA1UFZ, was held in Newington September 26-October 1. Six students representing five countries (Brazil, Ghana, Nigeria, Ethiopia, and the Philippines) attended the course, and two earned United States Amateur Radio licenses on the closing day. Jon Siverling is representing ARRL on the United States Delegation to the 2010 ITU Plenipotentiary Conference in Guadalajara, Mexico. The ITU Secretary General, Dr. Hamadoun Toure, HB9EHT, was reelected without opposition. Brennan Price attended the ARRL/TAPR Digital Communication Conference before the USTTI class, and is attending the AMSAT Symposium this weekend. He completed United States contributions for the upcoming Working Party 5ABC block meetings this week. Media & Public Relations Reported by Allen Pitts, W1AGP As promised, Jack Browne has written a correction to his previous misinformation in Microwaves and RF. There has been a upsurge in email use on the PR email reflector and a new "Now Hear This" audio was posted to the Website. The SM review of proposed job description updates for PIOs and PICs has resulted in several positive statements of the documents as written (no changes needed). Development Reported by Mary Hobart, K1MMH The Education & Technology Program campaign has reached $31,361 from 450 donors. The second issue of the Spectrum Defense Matters newsletter is scheduled to mail by October 8. The Defense fund has reached $130, 680 in revenue so far. A mailing to more than 6000 Diamond Club donors will mail the week of October 4to encourage renewals by December 31 with a 2011 ARRL calendar offer. The diamond club has reached $189,502 in net revenue for the year. Development has submitted a budget for 2011. Production/Editorial Reported by Joel Kleinman, N1BKE The following books were released to the printer: Ham Radio License Manual, 2nd printing Antenna Compendium Volume 8 The ARRL Guide to Antenna Tuners Khrystyne Keane wrote and distributed The ARRL Letter and voiced and produced ARRL Audio News for September 30, 2010. Membership & Volunteer Programs Reported by Dave Patton, NN1N DXCC Branch Credits Applications 2009 Carryover 178,483 1,322 2010 Received 585,892 4,946 Cumulative Total 764,375 6,268 2010 Processed 678,464 5,624 Remaining 85,911 644 Processing Time 5 Weeks Logbook of the World Category September 2010 % Change Jan - Sept 2010 QSO Records Entered Into System 299,212,817 14% QSL Record Matches 32,684,485 21% Logs Processed 1,653,169 29% Active Certificates 54,170 14% Registered Users in System 35,879 14% Logbook (Email Only) Inquiries September 2010 Maintenance 816 Initial Setup Inquiries 675 Award Related Concerns 144 Customer Usage Issues 273 Phone Calls 219 Total 2,127 W1AW Joe processed one Qualifying Run endorsement and one certificate. He also created the texts for the October W1AW Qualifying Runs. Joe began culling parts to construct a digital interface that will be sent to the GAREC-2010 conference. Scott worked on fast and slow code practice files for the early part of the month of October. He also assisted the DXCC department with the editing of applications. Field Organization/Public Service Team Several reports were received of over the horizon radars being heard on 40 meters. One on 7054 kHz was identified as coming from Kaliningrad, and one on 7142 kHz was tentatively attributed to the Chinese military. Tennessee Official Observers are investigating interference on a Nashville repeater. Western New York OOs are investigating a report of lack of proper identification on an IRLP node. A beacon from Mexico was reported as interfering with a 12 meter NCDXF beacon on the same frequency. The Region 2 Secretary was contacted, who in turn coordinated efforts with the Region 2 Beacon coordinator, to work out a resolution. A report from Region 1 regarding reception of weather FAX being received on 20 meters from a US Coast Guard station was relayed to the station for their information. Some nice comments were received by the Field Organization Staff from the five new Section Managers who were at HQ the previous weekend for their Workshop. Section Leaders and ARES teams throughout the country geared up for the Simulated Emergency Test weekend on October 2 and 3. Several SET reports have already been submitted. Editorial work is underway for the December QST Public Service column. Sincerely Compiled by, Lisa Kustosik, KA1UFZ Assistant to the CEO Staff Absentee List All Staff 11/25-11/26 Holiday Mike Corey 10/8-10/16 GAREC Conference, Curacao/Vacation `` 10/31-11/4 IAEM Conference, San Antonio, TX `` 11/17 NPSTC Meeting, Washington, DC Steve Ewald 10/18-10/24 Vacation Dan Henderson 10/13-10/19 Pacificon, San Ramon, CA/Beale AFB `` 11/12-11/16 Indiana State Convention, Ft. Wayne, IN/Vacation Mary Hobart 10/15-10/16 Pacificon, San Ramon, CA `` 10/22 Vacation `` 10/29 Vacation `` 11/5-11/8 Georgia State Convention, Lawrenceville, GA Debra Johnson 10/1-10/10 Vacation Khrystyne Keane 10/22 Vacation `` 10/29 Vacation Joel Kleinman 10/26 Vacation Harold Kramer 10/8-10/10 Florida State Convention, Melbourne, FL Brennan Price 10/8-10/10 AMSAT Symposium, Elk Grove IL Steve Sant Andrea 10/15 Vacation `` 10/18 Vacation Dave Sumner 9/30-10/9 IARU R2 Conference/AC Meeting, El Salvador `` 10/22pm-10/24 Executive Committee Meeting, St. Louis , MO Sharon Taratula 10/29-11/1 Vacation

1 0

[arrl-odv:19407] Re:ReconRobotics; an Update for the Board
by dick＠pobox.com 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

12 OCT 2010 - 1114 CDT Hello Chris... FYI, my (now considered ancient) SDSL service delivered both sets of attached PDF files. - Dick Isely, W9GIG

1 0

[arrl-odv:19405] ReconRobotics; an Update for the Board
by Chris Imlay 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Greetings. It is past time I brought the Board up to speed on the status of the ReconRobotics proceeding, and distributed the latest documents. This proceeding is getting complicated, so let me try to simplify the situation as much as possible. The Executive Committee has been getting the “play-by-play” details of this (and has been asked to approve all ARRL filings in advance), so this is not news to them. There are three “theaters of war” at the FCC that we are involved with simultaneously in this one proceeding (this is a matter of necessity, frankly, as you will see). The first is a combination of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau together. The second is the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau alone. The third is the Office of Engineering and Technology. This matter started with the filing on January 11, 2008 by ReconRobotics (RR) of a waiver request aimed at the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. RR asked for waivers of three Part 90 rules so as to allow the filing of an application for equipment authorization and for RRs customers to license and use the Recon Scout device (RS) in portions of the 420-450 MHz band. The Waiver was placed on public notice in May of 2008, jointly by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB). WTB and PSHSB also jointly issued the February 23, 2010 Order that granted the waiver. ARRL filed its Petition for Reconsideration of that Order on April 6, 2010 and a reply to RR’s Opposition to it on April 16, 2010. Our Petition for Reconsideration (and one other filed by a Mr. Whedbee of Missouri) is pending now with no action yet by the Commission. We asked, among other things in our Petition for Reconsideration that the two Bureaus stay the effectiveness of the Waiver Order pending the Reconsideration, since sale and licensing of the RS device by RR would cause the harm complained of in the Petition for Reconsideration. That action is entirely discretionary with the Bureaus. No action has been taken on that request yet. In the meantime, a total of 85 applications were filed in the ULS at FCC by individual applicants (public safety organizations) for licenses to use the RS. These applications were all in fact prepared by and filed by APCO, which is the Public Safety frequency coordinator for Part 90 licensing. APCO is a friend of ours and should not be looked down upon because it filed these applications. They essentially had to do this, though of course they charged a fee for it, probably paid by ReconRobotics rather than the individual applicants themselves. But the license applications were glaringly and seriously in error. They were at variance with the terms of the granted waiver, and they specified an emission designator that was about as far wrong as could be imagined. So, Ed Hare and I collaborated on a Petition to Deny that was approved by the EC and then filed against each and every one of these 85 applications. Without getting too specific about these petitions to deny, which we filed electronically through the FCC’s ULS system (administered by WTB), we have already done some good. This is because, though RR filed oppositions to the Petitions to Deny, APCO went into each application and amended it in order to substantially reduce the frequency range on which the applicant could operated the device (from 433-445 MHz to 436-442 MHz). APCO also reduced the number of units licensed from several in some cases, to one. These APCO changes were in direct response to our Petitions to Deny, but the amendments did not, moot our Petitions to Deny. We still have several arguments that RR has not adequately rebutted which should cause these applications to be held up for a very long time. Without doubt, the applications will have to be substantially amended again before they could be granted. But to amend them as they should be amended would require changes in the grant of equipment authorization (certification) of the RS device. The bulk of the problems with the 85 applications were due to inaccurate information in the April, 2010 grant (the grant was issued by one of several private test labs working contractually with FCC called “TCBs” or “Telecommunication Certification Bodies”) of equipment authorization for the RS. As but one example, the applications for equipment authorization, and the TCB grant, show an emission designator indicating a 100 kHz necessary bandwidth. This is for a 6 MHz wide channel bandwidth (!) and the emission is an NTSC (analog) AM modulated black and white television signal with no sound. The necessary bandwidth of this signal should be around 5.7 MHz, not 100 kHz. We took Ed Hare’s engineering exhibit (an excellent analysis of the serious flaws in the application for, and the TCB grant of equipment authorization) that we had used in the 85 Petitions to Deny, and re-filed it with the FCC’s laboratory, which is run by the Office of Engineering and Technology. We did this on October 4. A copy of our Letter to the OET Lab (which is headed up by Dr. Rashmi Doshi, who is well known to both Ed and me for different reasons) is attached to this memo. Our nemesis, Mitch Lazarus, filed on behalf of RR a typically nasty response only four days later. A copy of this is attached for your review also. Fortunately, it is incredibly weak (and on the procedural rules, notably in error) and so Ed and I plan a reply in the next few days that will, we hope, be effective in convincing the lab to rescind the TCB grant of equipment authorization to the RS device. Then the pleading cycle should pretty much be over and FCC will do whatever it is going to do. I will keep you better posted on our tri-theater battle against ReconRobotics as this continues. I have not been optimistic about our chances of success here, because the PSHSB is behind the waiver grant. From this FCC, PSHSB typically gets what they want. However, our arguments are just and solid and RR has been sloppy on their engineering since the beginning (unusual for a Mitch Lazarus client in my experience), so perhaps our chances are improving. Thanks to Ed Hare for expert engineering once again. 73, Chris W3KD Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret, Imlay & Tepper. P.C. 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG

1 1

RE: [arrl-odv:19399] Trip report - IARU Region 2
by Kay Craigie 11 Oct '10

11 Oct '10

Bruce Frahm has pointed out that I should have mentioned Chuck Skolaut K0BOG and Steve Ford WB8IMY as members of the League's HF Band Plan Committee. Sorry for the omission. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:19403] RE: [arrl-odv:19402] Spectrum Defense Matters, Issue #2
by Hobart, Mary K1MMH 11 Oct '10

11 Oct '10

My apologies to CTO Price for my rush to type and the resulting error in his name. It is, of course, Brennan Price. 73, Mary K1MMH Mary M. Hobart, K1MMH Chief Development Officer ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio(tm) Telephone: 860-594-0397 Fax: 860-594-0259 email: mhobart(a)arrl.org <mailto:mhobart@arrl.org> From: Hobart, Mary K1MMH [mailto:mhobart@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 12:11 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:19402] Spectrum Defense Matter, Issue #2 I am pleased to forward the vdf of Spectrum Defense Matters, Issue #2. This newsletter has been mailed to prior donors and e-mailed to donors who requested receipt electronically. In another week, this issue will be emailed to ARRL members who opt to receive information and special offers from ARRL and posted on the Spectrum Defense pages of the ARRL website. The next issue is schedule to Mail on or before December 1. The writing in this newsletter is gratefully attributed to CEO Sumner and CTO Brenna Price. The design and layout are credited to Di Szlachetka and Sue Fagan. Your feedback is most welcome. 73, Mary K1MMH Mary M. Hobart, K1MMH Chief Development Officer ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio(tm) Telephone: 860-594-0397 Fax: 860-594-0259 email: mhobart(a)arrl.org <mailto:mhobart@arrl.org>

1 0