1. Messages
  2. Scarborough Reef

Re: Scarborough Reef

Ria, N2RJ
 

I didn’t state that it was underwater. I only stated that *if* it was underwater it should be removed. This is a conditional statement, not a declaration. 

73
Ria
N2RJ 

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 7:23 PM Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:
+ AA6YQ comments below

Difficult is one thing. Impossible is another.

If it is truly under water with no hope of any future operation ever being able to comply with the rules when activating it, even with permission of authorities then Scarborough should be deleted.

And the rules should be clear about what happens in that case, even with grandfathered entities.

But keeping an entity on the list that is permanently underwater is extremely unreasonable, to the point of being absurd.

+ Please cite your proof that BS7 is permanently underwater.

          73,

                 Dave, AA6YQ
Join {ARRL-Awards@groups.arrl.org to automatically receive all group messages.