Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7   Go Down

Author Topic: AA7JV/MM next scheduled stop - Marquesas Islands - RIB Remote DXpedition  (Read 1546 times)

N0UN

  • Posts: 924
    • eHam Forums are a waste of time

They sure had a great signal on 160M CW last night!

NĂ˜UN
Logged

AC7CW

  • Member
  • Posts: 1789

Dunno about this new-fangled stuff. I'm thinking that if they never set foot on land but dropped the setup via drone that might be a bridge too far...
Logged
Novice 1958, 20WPM Extra now... (and get off my lawn)

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589

What difference does it make if the humans feet don't touch the land.? I don't see the problem. In fact I would be fine with the radio equipment just being near some god forsaken Island. A reasonable distance like within the 3 mile limit of the territorial waters. I know there was a hella hue and cry when Dom and company were operating in Fiji with a boat tied up to the pier. Yeah, what difference does it make? Rules are rules you say?  lets change the rules to to fit our modern world. I don't care much for traditional things. Never have, never will. They were still operating from Fiji werent they? These RIBS definately fit within the rules I say. No matter how they got on the island, but like I said, I would be in favor of changing the rules that a boat within 3 miles of an island is "on the island" or as good as. I am sure many of you won't see it this way, but it sure would save one heck of a bunch of money and trouble. It would allow expeditions to dozens of "unobtanium" islands that are now not on the air and never will be again. DXing is JUST a game folks. It is NOT important in the world scheme of things, and the rules to the game are whatever we make them out to be. We can add DX entities and remove them just as fast.
Logged
73  James K0UA

KD6KVL

  • Member
  • Posts: 239

Lets take it further, if you hear the DX, you should get a card....I mean, your heard them....Everyone gets a trophy!  Or, delete all the hard entities because its not "fair".
DX equity for all.  Each to his needs and not to his accomplishments.  Work ethic is privilidge and not all have it.  We should take from those who have and distribute to those who don't, regardless of effort.
Frank KG6N Comrades.
Logged
Frank KG6N

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042

I am starting to just laugh at some of you.

You won't contribute to DXpeditions (at least one of you loudly now says as much).  As if it were some sort of virtue.

But, you won't do anything to make expeditions more reasonable to put on, either.

You don't go yourself, so you have no real feel and understanding of the burdens you are placing on other people.

You are dimly aware, at best, that the DXpeditioner is subsidizing you.

But, we must somehow freeze the world in place and pretend it is still 1966 as far as DXpeditioning goes.  When, in fact, it is not.

Love RIB, hate RIB, but recognize one key fact.

They did it in response to changes in the externally imposed rules that actual DXpeditioners have to follow.

The entire RIB technology was devised by DXpeditioners.  They did not do it on a lark or to troll you.

They did it because of externally imposed rules that you and I, the stay at homes, refuse to react to.  We want DXCC to be hard.  Well, to a degree, so do I.

But, you all don't seem to care if life changes to make it harder.  Or that it makes DXpeditioning much more expensive than it once was.  The pain we are willing to inflict on others to preserve the illusion of yesterday is immense.  I don't agree with that one.  I want a healthy DX program.  By contrast, one that is a sucker's game; that is impossible if you started after 2006 has no future.  Worse, any of those under 40 that read the tea leaves as I do will quietly leave if we all, the ones that "got ours" in the 1990s, refuse to bend. 

You worry about too many grey beards in DXing?  Maybe you should rethink your belief that the rules came on godly tablets.

RIB is a shot across some of our self-satisfied little bows.  It is telling us in no uncertain terms, from those that actually do it, that the game has changed.  And, they are trying mightily to square the circle between our fantasies of a world that hasn't changed with one that actually has.

Example:  If we relented, selectively, on the /MM thing (for instance) just for three places:  Bouvet, Peter I, and Heard, we could have annual expeditions to these places.  Our stations would not change.  The pileups would barely change.  It doesn't really affect us.

What would change drastically is the cost we impose on other people.  But oh, no, anything but that.  Making life a little more bearable for those that subsidize us is the worst.  Why, we might actually have more DX to actually work because the dollars are, in the end, limited.  Can't have that one.

Similarly all this angst on where the DXpeditioner's butt resides does not affect you and I in the slightest.  But, it does reduce the expense and reduces the ever-mounting environmental objections to dozens of places, including at least two of the three I mentioned.  Plus others I didn't.  It also, as the photo I posted demonstrates, increases the number of places we can DXpedition from.  That's more than "convenience" in some parts of the world.  It is my understanding that South Sandwich happens because of a particularly nasty little maneuver on Thule Island and only Thule Island.  Well, what if RIB means more of the islands in the South Georgia chain became possible?  Would that interest you?  It would sure interest me.

Logged

VA3VF

  • Member
  • Posts: 4509

Quote
I would be in favor of changing the rules that a boat within 3 miles of an island is "on the island" or as good as.

I still see merit in this idea since it was first mentioned some time ago. To make it more amateur radio related, I would suggest the operators and their equipment must be within a subsquare (6 digit grid square) touching land. This would be roughly a 3 x 4 miles square.
Logged

NU1O

  • Member
  • Posts: 5115

Quote
I would be in favor of changing the rules that a boat within 3 miles of an island is "on the island" or as good as.

I still see merit in this idea since it was first mentioned some time ago. To make it more amateur radio related, I would suggest the operators and their equipment must be within a subsquare (6 digit grid square) touching land. This would be roughly a 3 x 4 miles square.

What is so special about 3X4? 10 miles seems close enough.
Logged

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042

Quote
What is so special about 3X4? 10 miles seems close enough.

It's a pretty arbitrary choice in the end.  The grid squares vary quite a bit in size as one heads closer to or farther from the equator.

Pick a mileage that is beyond or mostly beyond politics and we'd be OK.  Some nation states claim a 200 mile "border" from their land mass over "their" oceans.  But a lot still pick more reasonable distances.  So, yeah, 10, 16, 32 from the nearest land, some distance like that could be picked to minimize political interreference with DXCC.  I mean, we already have plenty of external politics interfering (EZ, P5 right now, at least), so if we are to bother with this, we may as well have a rule that recognizes that reality.

I wouldn't mind a rule that allowed us to activate P5 at 10, 15, 30 miles out (whatever won't get the boat captured Mayaguez style). Screw P5 and its paranoid little government.  We don't have to put ourselves in thrall to them.  We do so now out of choice.
Logged

VA3VF

  • Member
  • Posts: 4509

Quote
Pick a mileage that is beyond or mostly beyond politics and we'd be OK.

That was the intent, to keep it in the amateur radio realm as much as possible. Grid squares are used in the hobby already, so why not?

My apologies for the suggestion. Consider it withdrawn. ;D

Quote
I wouldn't mind a rule that allowed us to activate P5 at 10, 15, 30 miles out (whatever won't get the boat captured Mayaguez style).

I'm not sure it is a good idea to bypass government authorization for activation within or outside a country's sovereign territory or area under its jurisdiction, like the EEZ.

I think it's a change too far. We are now entering relativism, not good.

I'll preemptively apologize for this one as well. Consider it withdrawn. 8)
Logged

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042

Quote
I'm not sure it is a good idea to bypass government authorization for activation within or outside a country's sovereign territory or area under its jurisdiction, like the EEZ.

You're probably right.  But I would be in favor of something because I am annoyed at us bowing down to these kinds of regimes.

We don't think much of these places in our daily life. Why let these guys dictate to us what our awards are going to be?  If they don't want us, then one way or another, screw them.

Delete them, suspend them, declare some station in Hawaii a "ham radio government in exile."  It's all the same with me.  Some of those are no doubt better ideas that others.  I'm just  tired of letting these guys tell us our business.  I don't think there is another hobby that lets itself be beholden to despots in this manner.

If they don't want us, why do we want them?
Logged

VA3VF

  • Member
  • Posts: 4509

Quote
But I would be in favor of something because I am annoyed at us bowing down to these kinds of regimes.

I understand the frustration, and I share in it.

That said, the best we can do is to establish a more flexible #1 HR criteria. I know what you're thinking: Here is the guy that is against relativism being a relativist himself. :o

For rocks in the middle of the ocean, delete them if no longer there, end of story.  Actual countries are different, a deletion is not appropriate, unless they are no more.

We must accommodate the pride and honor of those "guilty" of being born at the right time, and "smart" enough of becoming a ham then. But, we must also nurture the hobby for future generations.

What's the solution then...no, workaround? Perhaps a review of the active DXCC list once a generation. Still imperfect, one may have become a ham at 10 while another at 70, life is not fair, and pursuing perfection in this matter is a guaranteed recipe for failure.

We need to make it achievable in a lifetime. Again, if you joined the hobby at 70 or 80, sorry, not much can be done in those cases. Time, effort, skills and investments will still be requirements, no participation trophy is being proposed here. We are just trying to mitigate limitations that are totally and completely out of our control.

I think I mentioned this in the past...I was very happy to attend one of those dinners at Dayton/Xenia where they call the people with the highest lifetime totals. I was sincerely happy for them, but it did nothing for my hobby pursuits. And why was that? Because I cannot change when I was born, became a ham, or when entities were deleted. It's simply not my reality and the reality of many in one or more generations.

OK, enough...or people will put me on ignore, not that I care, I just want to save them some work. ;D

Oh, yes...I hijacked the thread, sorry. Back to the original topic. I'm in favor of RIBs. ;) I decoded them a couple of times too, but no contact. :'(
Logged

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042

We need a word and "current" and "active" are already at least somewhat taken.

Let's define a category called "Available".

"Available" is defined as any DXCC that has had at least 20,000 QSOs over a 20 year period. 

So, we now have four categories of HR and nobody loses anything:

Lowest rung:  "Available Honor Roll".  Work all "available" DXCCs such that no more than nine are outstanding.

Next rung:  "Honor Roll".  Work all DXCCs, whether "available" or not such that no more than nine are outstanding.  Same as today.

Next rung:  "Available #1 HR".  Work all "available" DXCCs.  None are unconfirmed.

Top rung:  "#1 HR".  Work all DXCCs. None are unconfirmed. Same as today.

None of these are participation trophies, either.  They all of them represent a significant level of DX accomplishment and each is distinguished from the other in terms of difficulty (and prestige).

How to deal with DXCC Challenge I leave to others.  But, in my long held view, most of the mischief, and heart ache come from #1 HR and somewhat from HR being the only top games in town.

The thing is, if you started after about 2006, the "available" rungs look achievable and the regular ones, less so.  They are still there, but if people have something they believe they can actually get they are more likely to hang around.

Maybe, somewhat independent of this, we might also add a 2750 endorsement to the DXCC Challenge program.  For a lot of hams, that is the most achievable version of the award.  There are a lot of folks for whom 3000 just isn't realistic.  We need something for folks who have cleared the 2500 bar to shoot for that is realistic.

In any case, 2750 is a real (if unofficially recognized) achievement.  We have precedent for handing out endorsements for smaller increments as the achievements get greater.  Just stick the 2750 medallion (which could look like the other four) over the current square and have it sit there until or unless 3000 is made.  For most hams, 2750 would be the last one if they even get that far.  But, it's more realistic for a lot of hams than 3000. 
« Last Edit: April 03, 2023, 05:03:26 PM by WO7R »
Logged

KC0W

  • Member
  • Posts: 1542

 RIB is yet another example of how liberalization is destroying things that once took actual work & dedication achieve. Great job guys, keep on leveling that playing field. 

                                                                           Tom KH0/KC0W   
Logged

WO7R

  • Member
  • Posts: 6042

Quote
RIB is yet another example of how liberalization is destroying things that once took actual work & dedication achieve. Great job guys, keep on leveling that playing field.

You're a real DXpeditoner that I respect.  At least your position affects you, a DXpeditioner, personally.  Please tell me what RIB is "destroying".

There are tiers to this.  Have you been to places like South Georgia?  Do you know what it would take to get you there, singly or in a group?  Would a smaller human foot print help?

I can see why one might object to taking something like this to KH0, where operating restrictions are (I presume) minimal.  You have been able to avoid nature preserves and the like?  You have a regular house, right?  It's more expensive (I presume) but that is it.  Correct me if I have this wrong.

What is your answer for situations like Baker (which barely happened) where the team had to argue that verticals  (yes verticals) would not be a danger to wildlife; protected birds in particular.  What happens if next time the environmental pooh-bah says "no" because verticals, never mind spider beams, were too much?  What if they decide they don't want laterines on these preserves anymore?

Would you then be less opposed, in such a case, to being able to park an RIB on a smaller sandbar where the official knows there are no birds and therefore can say "yes"?  A sandbar that a team could not live on? 

This is not an academic example.  RIB came directly out of the experience on Baker in particular, but I've seen similar talk on other places that happen to be nature preserves we want to activate.  Far too many, in fact.

It could be other places, too.  What if we were allowed to do an RIB at Midway?

This is a shakedown cruise for more difficult operations, or so I gather.  They may become more commonplace despite this, but they could be important for a lot of ever-tougher to activate places.  So the Baker team that is doing this says.

Tell me what you think here.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7   Go Up