Hey! I'll call and raise you two! Unattended operation is not just "not prohibited", it is specifically allowed.
97.3(a)(6)Automatic control. The use of devices and procedures for control of a station when it is transmitting so that compliance with the FCC Rules is achieved without the control operator being present at a control point. 97.109(d) When a station is being automatically controlled, the control operator need not be at the control point. As you say each of these rules do require a control operator for the station AND neither of these rules have verbiage relieving the control operator of meeting all the requirements you have listed. However, they do not require the control operator to be present. In other words, if someone claims harmful interference and you are operating unattended, I don't see where you would have a leg to stand on when claiming you didn't interfere. At the very least, you couldn't have followed 97.101(b) and you are putting yourself at a large risk for not being able to meet 97.101(c). By the way, the claim for semi-automatic operation is a joke. The rules very plainly delineate three types of control, local, remote, and automatic. That's it, end of story. The rules also plainly detail what an auxiliary station station is when using an RF link to control your station remotely, and a winlink client simply doesn't meet the requirements for an aux station or a telecommand station. Jim WA0LYK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Dave AA6YQ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Unattended operation is not prohibited. However, every station must > have a control operator (97.7) that fulfills specific duties > (97.105) that include not transmitting when the frequency is already > in use (97.101d). The cited sections are appended below for your > convenience. > > All of part 97 is available via > > http://www.w5yi.org/page.php?id=57 > > 73, > > Dave, AA6YQ > > > 97.7 Control operator required > > When transmitting, each amateur station must have a control > operator. The control operator must be a person: > > (a) For whom an amateur operator/primary station license grant > appears on the ULS consolidated licensee database, or > > (b) Who is authorized for alien operation by §97.107 of this Part. > > > 97.105 Control operator duties > > (a) The control operator must ensure the immediate proper operation > of the station, regardless of the type of control. > > (b) A station may only be operated in the manner and to the extent > permitted by the privileges authorized for the class of operator > license held by the control operator. > > > 97.101 General standards > > (a) In all respects not specifically covered by FCC Rules each > amateur station must be operated in accordance with good engineering > and good amateur practice. > > (b) Each station licensee and each control operator must cooperate > in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most effective > use of the amateur service frequencies. No frequency will be > assigned for the exclusive use of any station. > > (c) At all times and on all frequencies, each control operator must > give priority to stations providing emergency communications, except > to stations transmitting communications for training drills and > tests in RACES. > > (d) No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere > with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of jgorman01 > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 5:09 PM > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Beacon's ? > > > What rule says you can't leave an automatic station unattended? It > would be a great rule, but I don't see it. > > Jim > WA0LYK > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "John Becker, WØJAB" <w0jab@> > wrote: > > > > > > It is one thing to be " automatic " and " attended " > > and another to be " automatic " and " unattended ". > > > > The rules say you can't be " unattended " > > > > > > > > > > > > At 11:19 AM 1/5/2008, you wrote: > > > > >A station transmitter without a homo sapiens located at a > > >receiver *at the location of the receiver* is unattended. Some > > >have confused the issue by claiming that a remote station (i.e. a > > >Pactor station) that is activated by another station hundreds or > > >thousands of miles away, is "attended" because it was activated > > >by the distant station. This is "unattended" transmitting because > > >the distant station cannot check the channel to see if it is > > >clear due to the properties of skip. > > > > > >So Rick's use of the terms was correct. The concept of a distant > > >activating station "attending" a remote transmitter is incorrect. > > > > > >de Roger W6VZV > > > > > > > > > > > >Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > > >http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > > > > > > > > >View the DRCC numbers database at > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/database > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > >
