[arrl-odv:30245] Fwd: ARRL Field Day Issue
Greetings, I am forwarding this e-mail to odv for every one's information. Glenn is an old friend, and long-time life member who has served ARRL for many years in both elected and appointed positions. I believe Glenn has made some good points and will very much appreciate your careful consideration of his suggestions for FD 2020. Thank you, and stay well. 73, Bob W6RGG ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Glenn Thomas <glennt@gbis.com> Date: Sat, May 2, 2020 at 11:32 AM Subject: ARRL Field Day Issue To: <w6rgg@arrl.org> Hi Bob, I understand that there is no plan to update FD to adapt to the reality of COVID19 and the ensuing emergency. This is a serious mistake in that it challenges the perception that Amateur Radio has enough flexibility to be a viable emergency communications resource. This year it also reduces the amount of support the ARRL provides to local clubs and so challenges the perception that the ARRL supports local clubs. The ability of Amateur radio to function "when all else fails" is our main selling point. Part and parcel of this is the ability of Amateur radio to respond in an appropriate and flexible manner, no matter the emergency. This flexibility, which far exceeds that typically found in our served agencies, is what we have to offer to society. The current situation is that the current "shelter in place" (SIP) orders present in many states is symptomatic of an emergency in progress. This is not a communications emergency - everything still works - so Amateur Radio is not really needed for supplemental communications. Because we're currently not needed, a more short sighted view is that we are in general unnecessary. While this view is incorrect, the optics are not good.
From its inception Field Day (FD) has been touted as an opportunity to exercise Amateur radio emergency communications. It has also become a significant social and contest event for many radio amateurs. The social and contest aspects serve to motivate amateurs to participate that otherwise might not, but the process is still that of an emergency communications drill.
Historically, FD has been a major club event. The SIP removes the advisability of clubs meeting for FD as they have in the past. The lack of ARRL recognition of this gives lie to the claim that ARRL supports local clubs. This year, we need to demonstrate our flexibility by responding to the existing emergency as part of our once a year exercise. Unfortunately, in not adapting to the COVID19 SIP, we are demonstrating organizational inertia. We are being foolish in NOT adopting "this year only" changes to the FD rules. What are my qualifications to make this determination? I have ten years of experience as an ARRL Section Manager in the SCV section as well as additional years of service as an ARES EC and DEC. My SM term of office included ARES/RACES support of several serious wildfires and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. I've completed levels I, II and III of the ARRL-sponsored ARECC classes as well as several basic emergency courses provided by FEMA and the American Red Cross. In terms of the relationship between the ARRL and local clubs, I served as the Nevada section Affiliated Club Coordinator for several years and made a point of visiting as many clubs as I could during my tenure. In short, I have the appropriate training and experience to determine if and when a serious policy error is being made. Quite a few "this year only" rules have been proposed and rejected by the ARRL powers-that-be. This general rejection is a serious policy error. A significant discussion amongst our FD group, which is spread out across several states, has led to the general conclusion that a new rule should provide recognition of the various SIP decrees in effect. My preferred rule change is for the existing "thousand foot circle" rule to become a "thousand mile circle" rule**. In this manner, we can each of us participate in FD without leaving home and still have the contest and social aspects of FD. The emergency communications exercise aspect can be retained by setting up the same kinds of infrastructure, e.g. emergency power, at home that we would have set up at our usual FD site. For some kinds of emergency, like the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, emergency operation from home is a desirable capability. Instead of playing down this capability, we need to explicitly exercise it. The use of a single call for our FD operation should not be an FCC rules problem. W1AW has done something similar in the past. The only requirement is that the holder of the station license authorize the operation. A possible objection is the choice of section for our FD report, given that we are spread out over four states, three ARRL divisions, and half a dozen ARRL sections. This should not be an issue if we adopt and all report whatever ARRL section is at the center of our 1000 mile circle**. The "center of the circle" rule could be kept as part of the standard FD rules to cover the case where a groups 1000" circle happened to include more than one section. Another possible objection is that a "this year only" rule would not be supported by various logging programs. That's true, so what? Existing software is also unlikely to be able to precisely respond to a real emergency, so this particular objection is specious. The inability of any particular software to optimally respond to an emergency is something that happens and ought to be part of the drill. I appreciate that, absent a formal ARRL BOD action authorizing such a change, the appearance of a BOD member disagreeing with an established policy is contrary to ARRL BOD rules. I appreciate this and would hope that BOD members will respect my intelligence in this matter. I am hoping that this "this year only" rule change will be announced in early June, late enough to demonstrate flexibility and early enough to allow planning at the local level. Summarizing, the lack of an ARRL organizational response with respect to FD to the current COVID19/SIP emergency reduces the amount of support given to local clubs while providing an unflattering image of ARRL. My own preferred COVID19/SIP "this year only" rule change to the FD rules* is to increase the size of the station circle from 1000 feet to 1000 miles as described. The inclusion of such a rule demonstrates the flexibility of the Amateur radio service to respond to an emergency by demonstrating flexibility in response to a real emergency. 73 de Glenn Thomas WB6W * Proposed new rule: For 2020 only, Field day Rule 4.1 text "All equipment (including antennas) must lie within a circle whose diameter does not exceed 300 meters (1000 feet)" shall be replaced with the text, "All equipment (including antennas) must lie within a circle whose radius does not exceed 1000 kilometers (622 miles). Stations whose circle contains more than one section shall report the section associated with the center of the circle." ** There are other approaches to the 'which section to report' question. One is for distributed club stations to report a section of "NET". This will look like a new section. The main objection is that it will break many logging programs, possibly including whatever software ARRL uses to score FD. As I said above, so what? This year there is a new CRRL section in play, so logging software may already be broken. Another approach is to report the section that the station license is in. Yet another approach is to simply pick a section and report that. As I said, there are several possibilities. Take your pick. w -- Here is Schrodinger's Epistemic Virus. We don't know that we have it because we can't be tested. We don't want to spread it, so we act as if we have it. We don't want to catch it, because we have no justification to believe we're immune. Thus, we have the virus ...and at the same time don't have the virus ...and also reserve judgement on the matter. Hence Schrodinger's Epistemic Virus.
This is timely. I was asked this very same question this week by Peconic ARC. Paul, N1SFE says that this is a common question for him - if members can use their club call at their own locations. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 00:24, Bob Vallio <rbvallio@gmail.com> wrote:
Greetings,
I am forwarding this e-mail to odv for every one's information. Glenn is an old friend, and long-time life member who has served ARRL for many years in both elected and appointed positions. I believe Glenn has made some good points and will very much appreciate your careful consideration of his suggestions for FD 2020.
Thank you, and stay well.
73, Bob W6RGG
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Glenn Thomas <glennt@gbis.com> Date: Sat, May 2, 2020 at 11:32 AM Subject: ARRL Field Day Issue To: <w6rgg@arrl.org>
Hi Bob,
I understand that there is no plan to update FD to adapt to the reality of COVID19 and the ensuing emergency. This is a serious mistake in that it challenges the perception that Amateur Radio has enough flexibility to be a viable emergency communications resource. This year it also reduces the amount of support the ARRL provides to local clubs and so challenges the perception that the ARRL supports local clubs.
The ability of Amateur radio to function "when all else fails" is our main selling point. Part and parcel of this is the ability of Amateur radio to respond in an appropriate and flexible manner, no matter the emergency. This flexibility, which far exceeds that typically found in our served agencies, is what we have to offer to society. The current situation is that the current "shelter in place" (SIP) orders present in many states is symptomatic of an emergency in progress. This is not a communications emergency - everything still works - so Amateur Radio is not really needed for supplemental communications. Because we're currently not needed, a more short sighted view is that we are in general unnecessary. While this view is incorrect, the optics are not good.
From its inception Field Day (FD) has been touted as an opportunity to exercise Amateur radio emergency communications. It has also become a significant social and contest event for many radio amateurs. The social and contest aspects serve to motivate amateurs to participate that otherwise might not, but the process is still that of an emergency communications drill.
Historically, FD has been a major club event. The SIP removes the advisability of clubs meeting for FD as they have in the past. The lack of ARRL recognition of this gives lie to the claim that ARRL supports local clubs.
This year, we need to demonstrate our flexibility by responding to the existing emergency as part of our once a year exercise. Unfortunately, in not adapting to the COVID19 SIP, we are demonstrating organizational inertia. We are being foolish in NOT adopting "this year only" changes to the FD rules.
What are my qualifications to make this determination? I have ten years of experience as an ARRL Section Manager in the SCV section as well as additional years of service as an ARES EC and DEC. My SM term of office included ARES/RACES support of several serious wildfires and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. I've completed levels I, II and III of the ARRL-sponsored ARECC classes as well as several basic emergency courses provided by FEMA and the American Red Cross. In terms of the relationship between the ARRL and local clubs, I served as the Nevada section Affiliated Club Coordinator for several years and made a point of visiting as many clubs as I could during my tenure.
In short, I have the appropriate training and experience to determine if and when a serious policy error is being made. Quite a few "this year only" rules have been proposed and rejected by the ARRL powers-that-be. This general rejection is a serious policy error.
A significant discussion amongst our FD group, which is spread out across several states, has led to the general conclusion that a new rule should provide recognition of the various SIP decrees in effect. My preferred rule change is for the existing "thousand foot circle" rule to become a "thousand mile circle" rule**. In this manner, we can each of us participate in FD without leaving home and still have the contest and social aspects of FD. The emergency communications exercise aspect can be retained by setting up the same kinds of infrastructure, e.g. emergency power, at home that we would have set up at our usual FD site. For some kinds of emergency, like the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, emergency operation from home is a desirable capability. Instead of playing down this capability, we need to explicitly exercise it.
The use of a single call for our FD operation should not be an FCC rules problem. W1AW has done something similar in the past. The only requirement is that the holder of the station license authorize the operation.
A possible objection is the choice of section for our FD report, given that we are spread out over four states, three ARRL divisions, and half a dozen ARRL sections. This should not be an issue if we adopt and all report whatever ARRL section is at the center of our 1000 mile circle**. The "center of the circle" rule could be kept as part of the standard FD rules to cover the case where a groups 1000" circle happened to include more than one section.
Another possible objection is that a "this year only" rule would not be supported by various logging programs. That's true, so what? Existing software is also unlikely to be able to precisely respond to a real emergency, so this particular objection is specious. The inability of any particular software to optimally respond to an emergency is something that happens and ought to be part of the drill.
I appreciate that, absent a formal ARRL BOD action authorizing such a change, the appearance of a BOD member disagreeing with an established policy is contrary to ARRL BOD rules. I appreciate this and would hope that BOD members will respect my intelligence in this matter. I am hoping that this "this year only" rule change will be announced in early June, late enough to demonstrate flexibility and early enough to allow planning at the local level.
Summarizing, the lack of an ARRL organizational response with respect to FD to the current COVID19/SIP emergency reduces the amount of support given to local clubs while providing an unflattering image of ARRL. My own preferred COVID19/SIP "this year only" rule change to the FD rules* is to increase the size of the station circle from 1000 feet to 1000 miles as described. The inclusion of such a rule demonstrates the flexibility of the Amateur radio service to respond to an emergency by demonstrating flexibility in response to a real emergency.
73 de Glenn Thomas WB6W
* Proposed new rule: For 2020 only, Field day Rule 4.1 text "All equipment (including antennas) must lie within a circle whose diameter does not exceed 300 meters (1000 feet)" shall be replaced with the text, "All equipment (including antennas) must lie within a circle whose radius does not exceed 1000 kilometers (622 miles). Stations whose circle contains more than one section shall report the section associated with the center of the circle."
** There are other approaches to the 'which section to report' question. One is for distributed club stations to report a section of "NET". This will look like a new section. The main objection is that it will break many logging programs, possibly including whatever software ARRL uses to score FD. As I said above, so what? This year there is a new CRRL section in play, so logging software may already be broken. Another approach is to report the section that the station license is in. Yet another approach is to simply pick a section and report that. As I said, there are several possibilities. Take your pick.
w
-- Here is Schrodinger's Epistemic Virus. We don't know that we have it because we can't be tested. We don't want to spread it, so we act as if we have it. We don't want to catch it, because we have no justification to believe we're immune. Thus, we have the virus ...and at the same time don't have the virus ...and also reserve judgement on the matter. Hence Schrodinger's Epistemic Virus.
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
participants (2)
-
Bob Vallio -
rjairam＠gmail.com