Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3rd Party Trivia Pursuit

Expand Messages
  • ray@sirois.com
    Here are some interesting trivia facts on 3rd Party Operations: 1. The first party is the amateur station sending the message, the second party is the station
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 8, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Here are some interesting trivia facts on 3rd Party Operations:

      1. The first party is the amateur station sending the
      message, the second party is the station receiving
      the message, the third party is the party whose
      message is being sent.

      2. Part 97.115 Is where the rules on third party situations
      are spelled out.

      3. Part 97.115(b) is specifically where we can give the mic to a
      non-ham and let him or her give the message themself. Putting a
      non-ham on the air is certainly considered a third party situation,
      and thus subject to the 3rd party rules pertaining to international
      countries with whom the USA does not have an agreement
      to allow 3rd party.

      4. Interestingly, our great friends in the UK do not have such an
      agreement with the US. So, no JOTA contacts with the UK!

      5. When the third party is a ham (eg a LICENSED scout)
      capable of being a control op, then there is a specific
      exception to the prohibition of third party traffic with
      international stations with no agreement. 115.(a)(2)
      So it is widely held that if they are a ham, then
      this exception kicks in and all is fine.

      6. It is "widely held" that the exception above enables
      novices and technicians (and generals for that matter)
      to operate an Extra class station, with an Extra class
      call and priveledges on Field Day, Contests, JOTA so
      long as they are hams, and so long as are supervised
      by the Extra class control op.
      In re-reviewing this rule, I concede, this widely held
      belief may well be in error.

      7. Interestingly, also, in such international QSOs w/third
      party, at the close of the QSO we are also required to ID the
      second party's callsign as well as our own.
      97.115(c)

      8. The ARRL has several pages of scenarios outlining
      these rules in their FCC Rule Book 12th edition...
      but our specific situation is still clear as mud.

      9. It is widely held that the third party can perform
      the station licensee's ID... (every 10min etc).
      I would recommend however, that the licensed
      control op make it clear to any concerned hams
      who may be listening on freq that the youngster (3rd party)
      non-ham is being well supervised. Especially on
      2m repeaters etc. No need to get folks all excited!
      <grin> <wink>

      10. I talked with my OO contacts at the ARRL today
      about #6 above... the fellow I talked to concurs,
      the widely held belief is based on a misinterpretation.
      On the other hand, it is highly unlikely that such a case
      would likely ever get escalated or acted upon if a
      complaint ever came in.
      It is even less likely that a complaint would ever come in
      on this issue on Field Day, JOTA, etc.
      He also said that this issue is on the agenda
      at the next ITU Conference because what was intended,
      what is in writing, and what is in practice is all different
      on this issue.

      Interesting stuff eh!

      73 de N1RY / WJ0TA
      Official Observer Coordinator - Maine Section
    • Fred Stevens K2FRD
      Since I am now totally confused and don t know where I stand, I copped out and sent an email to Riley. I ll post it when/if I receive a response. 73 de Fred
      Message 2 of 2 , Mar 8, 2002
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Since I am now totally confused and don't know where I stand, I
        copped out and sent an email to Riley. I'll post it when/if I receive
        a response.

        73 de Fred
        K2FRD

        At 11:12 -0500 08/03/2002, ray@... wrote:
        >
        >8. The ARRL has several pages of scenarios outlining
        >these rules in their FCC Rule Book 12th edition...
        >but our specific situation is still clear as mud.
        >
        >
        >10. I talked with my OO contacts at the ARRL today
        >about #6 above... the fellow I talked to concurs,
        >the widely held belief is based on a misinterpretation.  
        >On the other hand, it is highly unlikely that such a case
        >would likely ever get escalated or acted upon if a
        >complaint ever came in.
        >It is even less likely that a complaint would ever come in
        >on this issue on Field Day, JOTA, etc.
        >He also said that this issue is on the agenda
        >at the next ITU Conference because what was intended,
        >what is in writing, and what is in practice is all different
        >on this issue.
        >
        >Interesting stuff eh!
        >
        >73 de N1RY / WJ0TA
        >Official Observer Coordinator - Maine Section
        >info/terms/


        --
        73, Fred Stevens K2FRD
        Chenango Co. (NY) Assistant Emergency Coordinator
        Foothills District, Otschodela Council BSA Committees
        Otschodela Council Amateur Radio Group http://www.ascent.net/thefred/ocarg.htm
        K2FRD Personal Adventure page: http://www.ascent.net/thefred/K2FRD.htm
        Fred's newest toy: http://www.ascent.net/thefred/M1911A1.htm .
        Subscribe to the OCARG EAGLE monthly newsletter (no cost, no spam):
        Send email to: mailto:thefred@... 
         
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.