DXCC Rule #8

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by NG5E, Oct 23, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. NG5E

    NG5E XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I am operating aboard a vessel in Trinidad and was surprised to find out that ARRL doesn't consider me a valid DX contact when I'm aboard my vessel in territorial waters of Trinidad or while at dock in Trinidad.  The government of Trinidad requires me to obtain the proper permits and identify with the 9Y4 prefix in front of my call, but the ARRL says I'm not DX unless I move my station to the shore, which I have GRUDGINGLY done!  Surely there is some LOGICAL reason for this, but as I'm toting equipment off the ship to spend a few hours sitting at a folding table in the hot sun it just seems ridiculous!  If it weren't so darn fun I would just give up.
  2. Guest

    Guest Guest

    NG5E, it seems that we went through this exercise a year or two, ago did we not?

    The DXCC rules are developed by both staff and the DX Advisory committee. The DXAC are DXers just like you. They are appointed by each Division Director to serve as advisors. When I was Director of the West Gulf Division I was kept well informed by the DXAC member. The members are listed on the ARRL web site, or being as you are not in the United States, contact Rod Stafford, W6ROD, Vice President of International Affairs.

    I just have to ask, why has your ship been tied up to the dock for so long?


    Jim Haynie, W5JBP
    President, ARRL
  3. NG5E

    NG5E XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Mr. Haynie,

    You are either confusing me with someone else or mistaken. We DID have had a conversation before, but it concerned the future of CW. My vessel travels to and from Trinidad, but my first trip here was in May of this year. Our travels in and out of Port of Spain are well documented.
  4. WB0WAO

    WB0WAO Ham Member QRZ Page

    Wasn't this in response to some "questionable" operations in the past where the "DX" claimed to be operating from the entity, but in fact was quite a ways offshore. I seem to recall that it was someone from 6-land, but not sure. Was before my time [​IMG]
  5. NG5E

    NG5E XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    This thread has gone off on a tangent!  I E-mailed Jim Haynie and it seems he had a similar conversation with someone (not me) on eHam a few years ago.  He and I once had a conversation about how to spark new interest in CW, but that's another post.  May I steer this train back on track?


     I was curious what opinions were concerning DXCC rule #8.  This rule basically states that only land-based contacts count toward DXCC.  
    Do you agree with this rule?
     And, assuming proper licensing:
    Should a vessel in a countries territorial waters count towards DXCC?
    Or a vessel at anchor in a harbor?
     Permanently docked vessels DO count for DXCC.
    Should other vessels at dock count too?
  6. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I think vessels legitimately docked in harbor or port should count as being within that DXCC entity. After all, you're not "maritime mobile" until you're out at sea. When you're docked, you're parked and attached to land, even if only by chains or ropes.

    There's the "permission" aspect to consider, of course. An operation without permission of the entity's authoritative agency shouldn't count, just as an unauthorized operation on its land shouldn't count.

    Just as, evidently, P5/4L4FN's operation on CW doesn't count (for some reason)...or at least, it didn't, as his original operating privilege from the No. Korean government was for "phone" operation.

  7. W8FAX

    W8FAX Ham Member QRZ Page

    I suppose the biggest problem would be to prove whether the boat was where it said it was in all cases??? Also........hasn't the P5 been approved WITHOUT the proper paper work from a GOVERNMENT official?[​IMG] AL/W8FAX
  8. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Well, it's true an operator can lie about his location, but can't he lie just as well about being on land?

    I recall some of the W9WNV operations of 40 or so years ago...didn't Spratley Island turn out to be a hotel room in Vancouver or something-?

    I think with all the DXers using beams and capable of triangulation pretty easily, chatting amongst themselves off-the-air in real time using the internet, the opportunity for someone claiming to operate from somewhere he is not has been drastically limited. The Most Wanted List operations are mostly (not P5, obviously&#33[​IMG] big DXpeditions with too many people involved to try anything silly.

    If ARRL floated a referendum so the members could vote on this rule, I'd vote for letting "at port" operations count the same as fully land-based. Geesh, they're only a few feet from land.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: MarlFlea-1