Re: [DX-CHAT] [DX-NEWS] DXCC credit for BS7H
I received the following from Wayne Mills a few minutes ago concerning BS7H and Aves Operations: "no request was ever made to accredit it (BS7H). Therefore, no formal decision was ever made". Bill - Original Message - From: Bill To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 10:28 AM Subject: [DX-NEWS] DXCC credit for BS7H Below is a copy of a email I sent to ARRL DXCC desk and Wayne Mills. It is in ref to the latest article in QSL about the Aves Island DXP. I just can not understand why they will allow operations from the module used on Aves and not the Platform used on BS7. AmI missing something? Bill W4WX In June 94 the South China Sea Scarborough Reef DXpedition was not allowed DXCC credit because the guys had built a small platform to operate from. It surely was as much attached as one of the operating stations used during the last Aves Island DXP. I would say the platform on Scarborough Reef was more "attached" than the module on Aves. At BS7 the platform was directly attached to part of the reef above and below the waters surface. You can see a picture of a ladder extending from the rocks to top of platform. You had to walk from the rock, up the ladder to the platform... Just like Aves, you walked from beach across a walkway to the module. So why does the Aves Island get credit while BS7H is not?
[DX-CHAT] First BS7H operation
As I recall from being on the DX Advisory Committee at that time, we were told it didn't count. I don't remember who told us, but my best guess would be K5FUV, Bill Kennemer, who ran the DX program at that time. Huge photos were circulated showing the legs of the scaffolds were in the water and not above the high water mark or mean high water mark. If those legs were in the water, according to the rules if effect at the time, it should not count. Now it seems as if it is being pawned off with the remark nobody requested it count. I question the validity of that statement. 73, Charlie, W0YG.. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] First BS7H operation
Hi Charlie, All the legs (pilings) on the module on Aves are in the water.. I asked if the 94 BS7H asked for approval now whould it be accepted and got no answer. Maybe someone on the DXP will read this and fill us in. I hope so. Bill W4WX I see no difference. - Original Message - From: W0YG (Charlie Summers) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: DX-Chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 12:04 PM Subject: [DX-CHAT] First BS7H operation As I recall from being on the DX Advisory Committee at that time, we were told it didn't count. I don't remember who told us, but my best guess would be K5FUV, Bill Kennemer, who ran the DX program at that time. Huge photos were circulated showing the legs of the scaffolds were in the water and not above the high water mark or mean high water mark. If those legs were in the water, according to the rules if effect at the time, it should not count. Now it seems as if it is being pawned off with the remark nobody requested it count. I question the validity of that statement. 73, Charlie, W0YG.. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] The Two BS7H operations
I believed they approved the 95 operation. Rod WC7N Yep. '94 was not accepted, '95 was approved. I don't recall what changed. Still the same little piece of very damp rock! John, NT5C. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] First BS7H operation
I believed they approved the 95 operation. And I wonder why! Bill W5EC Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] TX9 Log Online
The TX9 group has posted their log online. Here is the link http://www.df3cb.com/logsearch/tx9/index.php I hope everyone is there! Mike W2LO Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] The Two BS7H operations
In a message dated 11/13/04 1:46:32 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yep. '94 was not accepted, '95 was approved. I don't recall what changed. Still the same little piece of very damp rock! The *story* I heard was that the second time around, they built a platform whose supports were ENTIRELY above water. I worked the first group on SSB and the second on CW. Sure would like to see the first operation credited !!! Tom N4KG
