Hi Fred, You referred to the provisions of 47 CFR ยง97.221 <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_1221&rgn=div8>, which pertains to certain provisions which do apply to "automatic control".
If a control operator is present at a control point then none of these restrictions applies, because within Part 97 of the FCC's rules the term "automatic control" has a special meaning; see 47 CFR 97.3 <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_13&rgn=div8>(6). For example, if a control operator is present at a control point where a version of WSPR-X is running which initiates a new CQ call without human intervention upon the completion of a contact, that would not be "automatic control" due to the presence of a control operator at a control point. If a station is not operating under "automatic control" then it may be operated under "local control" (where a control operator directly manipulates the operating adjustments in the station to achieve compliance with the FCC Rules), "remote control" (where the control operator indirectly manipulates the operating adjustments in the station through a control link to achieve compliance with the FCC Rules), or both. So in the situation cited above, the control operator may be physically present at the radio transmitter, or (for example" the control operator may be far away, but be in the presence of "control point" software running on a smartphone. David A. Behar, M.B.A., M.S.E. <https://www.seattleu.edu/scieng/computer-science/graduate/mse/> *Member Mensa <https://www.us.mensa.org/learn/about/>, Triple Nine Society <http://triplenine.org/WhatisTNS.aspx>, ISPE <https://www.thethousand.com/>* On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 12:01 PM Fred Price <n...@hotmail.com> wrote: > You might also want to read 97.221 > > On Aug 19, 2019 1:30 PM, "David A. Behar" <david...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andy, > > Here is the actual text of relevant FCC rules: > > *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. > > *Source: 47 CFR 97.3 > <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_13&rgn=div8>(6)* > > *Control point. *The location at which the control operator function is > performed. > > *Source: 47 CFR 97.3 > <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_13&rgn=div8>(14)* > > > *Local control.* The use of a control operator who directly manipulates > the operating adjustments in the station to achieve compliance with the FCC > Rules. > > *Source: 47 CFR 97.3 > <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_13&rgn=div8>(31)* > > > *Remote control. *The use of a control operator who indirectly > manipulates the operating adjustments in the station through a control link > to achieve compliance with the FCC Rules. > > *Source: 47 CFR 97.3 > <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=se47.5.97_13&rgn=div8>(39)* > > When a station is being remotely controlled, the control operator must be > at the control point. Any station may be remotely controlled. > > *Source: 47 CFR 97.109 > <https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?r=SECTION&n=se47.5.97_1109>(c)* > > > > *Bottom line: if the control operator is "present at a control point" -- > regardless of whether the station is operated via "local control" or > "remote control", and regardless of whether under normal conditions a > computer is performing all functions without human intervention -- in the > context of the FCC rules it's not "automatic control".* > > *The defining criterion is whether the control operator is present at a > control point.* > > David A. Behar, M.B.A., M.S.E. > <https://www.seattleu.edu/scieng/computer-science/graduate/mse/> > *Member Mensa <https://www.us.mensa.org/learn/about/>, Triple Nine Society > <http://triplenine.org/WhatisTNS.aspx>, ISPE <https://www.thethousand.com/>* > > > On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 10:53 AM Jim Shorney <jshor...@inebraska.com> > wrote: > > > Rules pertaining to Automatic Operation can be found in Part 97 sections: > > 97.3(6) > 97.221 > > 73 > > -Jim > NU0C > > On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 17:07:20 +0000 > Andy Durbin <a.dur...@msn.com> wrote: > > > "This is illegal software in the US and probably elsewhere, and should > > not be used, even with the added line "always attend to your transceive > > when using" this does not make it legal." > > > > What specific FCC regulations permit a single QSO to be auto sequenced > but prohibit auto sequencing of 2 or more QSO? > > > > I had been under the impression that disallowing auto QSO sequencing was > a preference of the developers so, if it is illegal, I'd appreciate a > reference. I can legally allow an unlicensed operator to make my QSO but > I can't allow a supervised computer to do it? > > > > Before you all jump on me - I have no interest in running an automatic > QSO machine. I'm only interested in the regulatory aspect of this. > > > > 73, > > Andy, k3wyc > > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
