[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL single op definition

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL single op definition
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Reply-to: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:02:09 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> KV4FZ was a control OPERATOR.  Without this Control OPERATOR Yuri would
> have been operating illegally.  Without him the results may have been
> far different.  We will never know.

Supposedly, Herb did not actually operate.

By definition, I can have an OPERATOR sit in my room and not be an actual 
OPERATOR . The only function of a control operator is to prevent or assume 
responsibility for any violations, there is no requirement he work the radio 
dials or log anything.

This is strictly an ARRL interpretation of what the ARRL accepts. They need 
to make the rules much clearer.

73 Tom 

CQ-Contest mailing list

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