CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Disruption of Emergency Communication during CQWW

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Disruption of Emergency Communication during CQWW
From: "Tom Mandera" <tsm1@tmcom.com>
Reply-to: tsm1@tmcom.com
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:21:31 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:16:06 +0100
> From: "Andreas Kretzschmar" <9y4w@gmx.net>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Disruption of Emergency Communication during
>       CQWW SSB        contest
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <20101111181606.161710@gmx.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>
> areas as part of a disaster relief teams, were able to communicate on 3815
> and give summaries of the situation as well as communicate with their
> respective Emergency Operations Centres.
>
> During the weekend Oct 30./31. 2010 this disaster communication was
> seriously impacted on both 3815 and 7162 kHz by the activities of the CQWW
> SSB contest.

While lid-ish behavior is frowned upon, period, and it would have been
courteous to QSY, did this really disrupt *Emergency* traffic, or traffic
related to a natural disaster but not of an emergency nature?

Where's the line drawn between "Emergency" and "Useful but not
life-threatening"?

Under the FCC "any means necessary when immediate life or property is in
danger" clause, would I have been authorized to operate out of band when
passing this traffic?  If so, that would've also opened up the option of
QSY-ing to the CW sub-bands without repercussions.

I'm curious where the line is drawn.

-Tom, KE7VUX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>