[Laser] Coherence and ARRL Contests

[James Whitfield]

Steve

Thank you for passing the information along to this list.

Even being one of those that rant at the ARRL, I agree with the suggestion 
to contact the appropriate committe representative.

I would also like to comment.  First and foremost, the issue to be discussed 
is very restricted, being only "if" further clarification of "the meaning of 
coherence" is needed.  It is a start.  In my opinion not a very good one 
since I have been trying to get some clarification on the meaning for nearly 
a decade.  This is not an open discussion of the technical merits of a 
coherent requirement, or even a technical standard of what is, and what is 
not, acceptable to comply with the requirement for "using coherent radiation 
on transmission".


Another thing:  You indicated that the notice was available to you "a few 
weeks ago".  I thought that I had somehow missed such an important 
announcement.  So I checked the ARRL website for any reference to the VUAC 
and this review of rule 1.12.  I found the South Carolina section news 
included it last Sunday as an item from the Roanoke Division VUAC 
representative.  I suppose that can lead an "ARRL rant" person like me to 
conclude that at the national level the VUAC does not want comments from 
just any ARRL member, but only from those specifically invited to comment. 
That seems to be a pretty close knit arrangement to me.  ( The word incest 
comes to mind, but I won't use it this time.  I am sure a better opportunity 
will come soon. )  If the locals ( CSVHFS, Central States VHF Society, of 
which I am a life member ) have heard about this, they are not sharing.

Of course, there is always the whole concept of the VUAC.  If one is to 
believe the ARRL web site, it was created in June 2006 for a term of three 
years, but not to exist more than five.  Assuming that VUAC addressed 
important issues first, I am surprised that rule 1.12 made their list at 
all.  With their mandate to "do no harm", I will be amazed if they even make 
a public report on the issue.

James
 n5gui


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "steve kavanagh" <skavanagh73 at yahoo.ca>
To: <laser at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 6:58 AM
Subject: [Laser] Coherence and ARRL Contests


This info showed up on our regional VHF email list a few weeks ago.  For 
radio amateurs in the USA and Canada, instead of ranting at the ARRL on this 
list, why not forward your considered views to your committee 
representative, seeing as they are apparently considering the issue of the 
contest rules on coherence at the moment ?

"The ARRL VHF/UHF Advisory Committee has been directed to review VHF Contest 
Rule 1.12 that states "Above 300 GHz, contacts are permitted for contest 
credit only between licensed amateurs using coherent radiation on 
transmission (for example, laser) and employing at least one stage of 
electronic detection on receive" to determine if the rule should be modified 
to make it clearer as to the meaning of coherence.  The VUAC is interested 
in your opinion and any suggestions that you may have.  Please forward your 
comments to your Divisions VUAC representative.  Your Division VUAC 
representative is listed at http://www.arrl.org/contests/vuac.html "

73,
Steve VE3SMA




      __________________________________________________________________
Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 
8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at 
http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
______________________________________________________________
Laser mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/laser
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Laser at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html