[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] license class and m-m ops

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] license class and m-m ops
From: sawyered@earthlink.net
Reply-to: sawyered@earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 13:19:54 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
This is a pretty interesting discussion that from my observation affects over 
half of the m/m, m/s, and m2 stations that I know of.  In reading the FCC Part 
97, it is quite grey as to the interpretation.

"(46) Third-party communications. A message from the control operator (first 
party) of an amateur station to another amateur station control operator 
(second party) on behalf of another person (third party)."

It doesn't say "radio" it says station.  The control operator is controlling 
the station at the time.  So if the control operator is operating radio 1 and a 
general class op is operating radio 2 in the extra class of the band (under the 
watchful eye of the control operator) there is consideration that this 
general's operation is illegal in some circumatances.  But why would the same 
radio 2 be considered legal just because this non-control operator happens to 
hold an extra class license?

Consider this for a moment:  I as an extra class operator am designated by my 
friend Dave K1TTT to be control operator of K1TTT during the upcoming ARRL DX 
contest.  A second operator, also Extra Class joins me and we decide to do M2.  
Since the station can only have 1 control operator (me) then all of the second 
operator's transmissions are considered third party and therefore potentially 
illegal according to the most strict interpretation of the law.  Nowhere does 
it say that an exception to the third party rule is if the third party is a 
duly licensed amateur radio operator operating within his/her class.  A third 
party, is a third party, licensed or not, extra, general, or tech.  

If someone kind find a citation in the Part 97 that says a third party is not a 
third party if they are duly licensed and operating within their license class, 
I'd love to see it.

Ed  N1UR

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [CQ-Contest] license class and m-m ops, sawyered <=