[SADXA] Fwd: DXAC Survey

[K5GS at arrl.net]

The following was posted on the Mile High DX Association reflector.

I will post my answers in another e-mail.

If you have an opinion you should send it to your DXAC rep.

Cheers,
GS K5GS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following discussion items are on the agenda for the DXAC.  As the 
Rocky Mtn Division DXAC member, I am soliciting input from DXers in the 
division concerning the following items up for discussion within the DXAC.

 1. Return of the RTTY mode DXCC Award
 2. DXCC 2025?  (2050? 2100?) ?
 3. Inactive Status for countries that do not allow amateur radio
    operation or have not been active for a number of years?
 4. New DXCC Awards ?

1.  There has been some interest in having the RTTY DXCC award separate 
from the Digital award.  Currently there is a Digital DXCC which 
includes RTTY as well as all digital modes such as FT-8 and FT-4 , etc.

Discussion Question.  Since  FT8 has pretty much replaced RTTY (like SSB 
replaced AM), is it worth the effort in trying to separate RTTY from 
Digital?  Should we return the RTTY mode DXCC Award?

**2.  New Entities / DXCC Rules Changes: The rules that are in place 
today have been there for 25 years, and with good reason.  Review of the 
lengthy discussions that took place as part of the DXCC 2000 effort in 
the mid-to-late 1990’s yielded an incredible set of guidelines and 
ultimately this set of rules that has clearly withstood the test of time.

Discussion Question:  Is it time to consider launching a “DXCC 2025” 
effort?  Is it time to think about changing the DXCC program and its 
rules?  The last effort was in the mid-to-late 1990s and resulted in the 
“DXCC2000” effort.  Should we revisit the DXCC rules on a periodic 
basis, and if so, how often?  What should be considered?


3.  When many of us began chasing DX years ago, there were several 
countries that had no amateur activity. China is one of the most notable 
of those that were inactive from back then.  Albania is another among 
many. Things have changed.  Over time, they do change through the 
various political changes and otherwise.  It seems that while there are 
a few countries that have not been active for several years, or may not 
be, perhaps we just need to be patient for things to change again.

Discussion Question:  Should Inactive Status be considered at all, or is 
this premature at this time? What about changing the criteria to qualify 
for Honor Roll as suggested before?   Inactive Status for countries that 
do not currently allow radio operations of have not been active for a 
number of years?  Several proposals have surfaced; in one case create an 
“Inactive Countries category” which effectively reduces the total number 
of “active countries” and reduces the number needed to make the honor 
roll.  A second approach has been to reduce the number of countries need 
to make the honor roll from say within 10 of all  current counties to 
15.  What is your opinion?

4.  The idea of having an annual DXCC competition has been suggested.  
Granted, others have annual awards, but the ARRL DXCC program does not.  
As we get more and more people who do qualify for honor roll, the DXCC 
program is no longer offering opportunities for many to continue active 
DXing, and perhaps by offering other types of awards, it may spark more 
interest.  If we’re lucky, Cycle 25 may bring enough sunspots to the 
ionosphere and drive more activity.

Discussion Question:  Should there be other types of awards added to the 
DXCC program, and if so, what would their criteria?  One proposal has 
been an annual DXCC competition.  Something on the order of CQ’s 
Marathon Award.


Please let me know what your input is on the above areas.  I would like 
to respond back to the DXAC by the end of Aug.

Thanks,

Dick, K8ZTT
Rocky Mtn DXAC Rep