Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !  (Read 2518 times)

W4AMP

  • Member
  • Posts: 164
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #45 on: March 01, 2023, 06:06:56 PM »

Oh, the drama!!!!

Logged

VK6CQ

  • Posts: 31
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #46 on: March 01, 2023, 06:07:35 PM »

3YOJ Website says landing permit issued by NPI. LA7GIA says no landing permit required ?
So which is it 3Y0J got a landing permit or don't got one because none required ? If they got one, then just put it on their website for all to see...easy, huh?
Logged

K1VSK

  • Member
  • Posts: 1950
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #47 on: March 01, 2023, 06:29:42 PM »

3YOJ Website says landing permit issued by NPI. LA7GIA says no landing permit required ?
So which is it 3Y0J got a landing permit or don't got one because none required ? If they got one, then just put it on their website for all to see...easy, huh?

Why perpetuate this here? We certainly aren’t going to resolve anything so the only other reason for doing so must be to instigate some controversy you want to create.
Logged

KC0W

  • Member
  • Posts: 1542
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #48 on: March 01, 2023, 06:48:28 PM »

 Welcome VK6CQ.

 I'm sure there are some people here who have a few questions. Sometimes they can be civilized while at other times.................. 
Logged

VK6CQ

  • Posts: 31
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #49 on: March 01, 2023, 07:31:41 PM »

I could just add that a landing permit is not needed to go ashore Bouvetøya, and will never be issued by NPI if you use a zodiac. Simply because it is not needed and thus not within their jurisdiction.. You only need permit if you plan to use a helicopter.  If it was me, before I would post anything like this maybe, just maybe, I would do some sense checks or ask someone more experienced than yourself.

https://www.npolar.no/en/regulations-bouvetoya-nature-reserve/
Er, Mr. Kenn, There's not many amateur DXers who are also Antarctic professionals out there who are more experienced than me.....Oleg Sakharov ZS1ANF / R1ANF maybe, perhaps.  I met him once in Cape Town; real nice guy and interesting to talk to about his long time living at the Russian Bellingshausen base in the South Shetlands.

Do you know anyone else, Mr. Kenn?, cos I don't!  If you do, then let me know the contact details and I'll sure be happy to ask for a professional opinion.

If you are correct that no permit or permission of any kind from NPI or Norwegian Govt. is required to land on Cape Fie at Bouvet, then Norway is the only country in the world that allows inexperienced members of the public to access its Antarctic territories without any kind of assessment of their plans or safety credentials etc. So Norwegian Govt. must never have heard of strict 'Duty of Care' legislation that all other countries with Antarctic territories have enacted many years ago. So Norway is quite happy if someone is seriously injured or killed on Bouvet and happy to pay multimillion kroner compensation claims or major costs of an international rescue mission etc.  I find that very hard to believe, Mr. Kenn.  Or did 3YØJ take out indemnity insurance to pay these costs or were maybe required to sign a waiver that absolve NPI or Norwegian Govt. of any kind of liability or legal responsibility if there was some serious accident or other crisis during 3YØJ operation, perhaps?   Maybe you should advise the DX Community about this or post the missing information onto 3YØJ website.  Maybe better all round if DX Community just wait and see what ARRL DXCC Desk, Norsk Polarinstitut and/or Norwegian Govt. have to say about the matter. 

Also, I never called for 3YØJ DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit, as the subject header of this post suggests.

Read the open letter properly; I suggested that ARRL should consider "revoke 3YØJ's accreditation on the grounds of reckless endangerment to life & limb" due to "continued ignorance of, or flippant disregard for, safety protocols". Then I listed several examples from 3YØJ's own Facebook page of 3YØJ Team members doing really dumb things that could easily have seriously injured or killed them. Ask any polar, alpine field guide or licensed zodiac diver and they will agree with me.

Best 73 de Alan BSc (Radio Physics), Professional Radio Officer Licences etc. etc.
VK6CQ VKØLD VP8PJ 9VØA VKØEK VKØMM CE9/VKØLD etc. etc.

Yeah, been there, done that many times in the past 40 years. So don't waste any time on anti-VKØLD smear campaign and turning the tables to try and publicly discredit me - I'm not the 300 Pound Gorilla in the room - I'm just the messenger boy; you will just end up looking more foolish than already.   
Logged

VK6CQ

  • Posts: 31
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2023, 08:54:20 PM »

Is there any merit to this or is just a another "karen" ??

https://ibb.co/zbJWpmq
https://ibb.co/tZvjqRd
https://ibb.co/fCDR9s8
https://ibb.co/DYPvRQJ
https://ibb.co/nrZWCxN
https://ibb.co/607yFZ2

https://ibb.co/z8fGtjy


73' John VK3YP

Er, Yes John, there is something to it, There's not many amateur DXers who are also Antarctic professionals out there who are more experienced than me.....Oleg Sakharov ZS1ANF / R1ANF maybe, perhaps.  I met him once in Cape Town; real nice guy and interesting to talk to about his long time living at the Russian Bellingshausen base in the South Shetlands.

Do you know anyone else?, cos I don't!  If you do, then let me know the contact details and I'll sure be happy to ask for a professional opinion.

Anyhow, GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT !!!!! I never called for 3YØJ DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit, as the subject header of this post suggests.

Read the open letter properly; I suggested that ARRL should consider: "revoke 3YØJ's accreditation on the grounds of reckless endangerment to life & limb" due to "continued ignorance of, or flippant disregard for, safety protocols". Then I listed several examples from 3YØJ's own Facebook page of 3YØJ Team members doing really dumb things that could easily have seriously injured or killed them. Ask any polar, alpine field guide or licensed zodiac diver and they will agree with me.

73 de Alan BSc (Radio Physics), Professional Radio Officer Licences etc. etc.
VK6CQ VKØLD VP8PJ 9VØA VKØEK VKØMM CE9/VKØLD etc. etc.

Yeah, been there, done that many times in the past 40 years. So don't waste any time on any anti-VKØLD smear campaign and turning the tables to try and publicly discredit me - I'm not the 'Elephant in the Room' in the room - I'm just the messenger boy.   
Logged

VK3YP

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #51 on: March 01, 2023, 10:06:04 PM »

Hi Alan,

Apologies for the misunderstanding for saying that you called for 3YØJ DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit, as the subject header of my post suggests.

As you have clarified it’s a safety issue around the dxexpedition.

But the “punishment”  shouldn’t call for dxcc to be not accredited.

John VK3YP
« Last Edit: March 01, 2023, 10:10:22 PM by VK3YP »
Logged

KD8MJR

  • Member
  • Posts: 6017
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #52 on: March 01, 2023, 10:22:50 PM »

So while I totally disagree with the Credit being revoked I am just wondering if there is any precedence of a Dxpedition credit being revoked for claims of recklessness. 

 IMHO these are grown men on a Dxpedition, not a bus load of school kids that are being blindly led.  If someone had a safety issue I am pretty sure they would have just stayed on the boat.  The boat was 100% certified for that voyage so it was definitely up to the individuals to assess if they could manage the conditions and where willing to leave the boat.
 

Logged
“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”  (Mark Twain)

US5WE

  • Posts: 34
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #53 on: March 02, 2023, 01:10:24 AM »

Just an outsider's view.
I have both 3Y1VC and 3Y5X QSLs accepted for DXCC many years ago so just planned to work 3Y0J on some bands for the Challenge purposes. Worked then on 30 meters and after numerous requests by pilots NOT to work 3Y0J on other bands or modes i quit not knowing that it was just a pilot's joke.  :'( Lesson learned.

Anyway, after reading the seven page opus by VK6CQ the obvious question arouse:
Who will benefit if 3Y0J operation will not get DXCC credit?
The answer is quite obvious – some influential group or resentful individual who decided, for some reason, to discredit the 3Y0J operation.

As long as the operation was a land based “foot on the ground” one, the only possibility for them to question its legitimacy was so called “landing permit” as the only DXCC rules paragraph which can affect the operation. The rest, like “disregarding of safety protocols, etc” was just pure demagogy.

Kenneth Opscar gave the comprehensive answer on “absence of landing permit” accusations  and hopefully this is the end of the story.

Lessons I learned from this and other DXPeditions in general and VK6CQ’s attempts in particular:

1. In accordance with “Miranda warning”, before DXCC approval, NEVER publish any documents, pictures, videos, interviews etc prior or during the operation, as those can be used  by some jealous groups or individuals to discredit the operation.

2. Ignore the DXPedition pilot’s warnings and requests. Recent “Not to Work Them” example has shown that the pilots can be useless and even harmful.

And finally: it was Norwegian Roald Ammudsen who, as the first man on Earth, has reached South Pole. “Teaching” Norwegians how to make Polar expeditions successful is counterproductive and even foolish. 
 
   
Logged
UARL Technical and VHF Committies
DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone) 10BDXCC (160-6m), 10BWAZ(160-6m),
ARRL field checker.

ON6KE

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2023, 01:39:06 AM »


And finally: it was Norwegian Roald Ammudsen who, as the first man on Earth, has reached South Pole. “Teaching” Norwegians how to make Polar expeditions successful is counterproductive and even foolish. 
 
 

Roald Amundsen.
Logged

US5WE

  • Posts: 34
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2023, 02:07:31 AM »

Roald Amundsen.
Of course, sorry, fat fingers are typing too fast. ;D
Logged
UARL Technical and VHF Committies
DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone) 10BDXCC (160-6m), 10BWAZ(160-6m),
ARRL field checker.

N1UR

  • Posts: 733
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2023, 02:13:23 AM »

The problem is that the DXCC Desk can just pull the accreditidation with new info at any time.  So just because you got it, however you got it, doesn't mean it will stay that way.  Its not "forever thus".

I personally don't think it should be discredited if whatever permits are required exist.  They were clearly operating from the island.  I have to assume they had what they need unless shown otherwise.

But I do think many aspects of this DXpedition harmed Most Needed Top 20 DXing going forward.

Ed  N1UR
Logged

VK6CQ

  • Posts: 31
    • HomeURL
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2023, 08:08:41 AM »


Anyway, after reading the seven page opus by VK6CQ the obvious question arouse:
Who will benefit if 3Y0J operation will not get DXCC credit?
The answer is quite obvious – some influential group or resentful individual who decided, for some reason, to discredit the 3Y0J operation.

I'm not a member of any influential group and I'm not some resentful individual trying to discredit the 3YØJ operation for some nefarious personal reason.  I've never been much interested in collecting QSL cards, DXCC status or whatever and I had no interest in trying to work 3YØJ or obtaining a Bouvet QSL card.  Anyways, I already have one as I used to talk to Chuck 3YØC quite regularly when I was active as VKØMM from Macquarie Island. He sent me a personal QSL in the form of a signed official NASA photo of himself all dressed up in his astronaut costume, which was a real nice gesture.

Like I said in the opening paragraph of my open letter, the success or otherwise of 3YØJ's scaled back on-air performance and other matters I leave to Others.  My primary concern was, and is, safety.

3YØJ website, FB page etc. made a big deal about how safety was also their number one priority. However, it was clear early on from their decisions and actions that getting on the air was actually their number one priority by far, even if it meant taking ridiculously stupid risks and possibly being killed. Time was starting to run out, corners were starting to be cut and safety had taken a back seat to the primary goals of landing and getting on the air, no matter what.  I therefore decided to make an objective and dispassionate appraisal of their safety performance and make it public to demonstrate just how dangerous their behaviour had become.

Should the ARRL be encouraging and perpetuating DXpeditions such as 3YØJ to engage in foolhardy, reckless and downright dangerous behaviour all in the name of "activating a rare one"?   I don't think so, and I'm willing to bet that the Team members' families back home don't think so either.

In a location as remote, hazardous and as physically demanding as Bouvet, it must be SAFETY FIRST, ALWAYS!

If revoking 3YØJ's DXCC accreditation is the price to pay in order to press this vital message home, then so be it. 

Logged

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2023, 09:57:06 AM »

I have certainly looked at DXpedition proposals, decided they were too thin on safety, and not contributed.  I don't want people to die so I can maybe get a post card. So, I don't contribute to those.

That should be the beginning and end of it, at least under the current rules.  I've noticed that a few of the more risky ventures fail for lack of funding, so I must not be the only one that behaves that way.

The rest is between the would-be expeditioner and the relevant authorities, which, nowadays, tend to give permission pretty grudgingly in the vast majority of cases.

The only other reasonable position is to declare some places too dangerous for a mere hobby and delete them from the list.  We already have special handling for Western Sahara, by name, and maybe one or two others, after all.  There is nothing but our own collective whims, as expressed through the ARRL that is at work here.  DXCC can be whatever we think we want, collectively.

But, this kind of after-the-fact carping is going to do nothing but raise blood pressure.  If the thing is on the list and someone gets permission, it's their neck.  If you don't want that, the way to go is to change the list

Ahead of time.

The league will do nothing and it certainly won't require perfect expeditions.  How is that to be determined after all?  The amount of Monday Morning Quarterbacking implied here is breathtaking and nobody, in fact, would put up for it very long.

Sheer practicality demands reasonable certainty.  We either disallow it up front, or we accept it if it is well-documented.
Logged

N0UN

  • Posts: 924
    • eHam Forums are a waste of time
Re: VK6CQ calls for 3Y0J DXCC to be invalidated due to no landing permit !
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2023, 11:18:20 AM »



"IBTL"

NØUN
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Up