Well, I respect your opinions, Tom, but I don’t have to agree with them. I think that in your reply you have made some questionable statements. A permit for a proven disabled operator (and how many of those are there?) is not going to open any floodgates - if a person is minded to cheat he WILL cheat, he will depend on the low probability of being caught out. He hardly needs to adopt the stratagem of pretending to be severely disabled, and even if he did the number of drive on summits that he could take advantage of is not large, particularly as if he is going to pretend to be severely disabled it will be known, and operations from less accessible summits will cause questions to be asked.
“More than enough inclusivity?” Bad wording, implying that our inclusivity should be reduced! It seems to me that it would be a very hard hearted person that would refuse to at least consider an easement of the rules for a severely disabled person.
As I said earlier, this is all hypothetical. If an application is ever received for an easement of a core rule for a severely disabled person, then no doubt the MT will then discuss the merits of the case, there is no point in drawing the battle lines this early!
Just some random reflections on disabled activations: it’s a complex subject. Just watch the Paralympics to get an idea of a. The fantastic capabilities and achievements of disabled people and b. The variation of levels and types of disabilities. presumably the disabled person can get out of their vehicle (with the exception of Davros ) - therefore why can’t they emerge at the summit of suitable hills (eg TW-004) to operate in the spirit of the rules? SOTA is a personal challenge. If someone genuinely gets a sense of personal achievement from activating a summit who am I to deny that? I won’t be repeating “summits” such as TW-004 and won’t get overly excited about anyone mounting an expedition to conquer them but I can still respect someone’s individual effort to overcome a challenge. I think we have a moral duty to both preserve the integrity of SOTA and support genuine attempts to overcome personal challenges within the spirit of SOTA.
I think the current rules manage that fairly well (permitting cycling, horseback & wheelchairs) - but we should remain open to debate. Otherwise how would we ever have blind skiers or legless sprinters ?
My personal opinion is that the use of a wheelchair (including motorised) should be allowed on a summit by a disabled person when there is no other option but direct operation from within a car should not be allowed. The control is always in the first line, the activators self control - if you believe you are operating reasonably within the rules, then as SOTA is a personal challenge, you are probably OK. Otherwise if someone cheats, they are cheating themselves and devaluing their efforts in their challenge and that of the chasers calling them.
If you are unsure wether what you wish to do is correct or not, you can contact a member of the MT via private message on this reflector or via email to get clarification.
The point of the thread is to establish if there or more challenges available to disabled people (activating) rather than just chasing and SWLing - something I achieved and met my initial personal goals.
No one is asking or suggesting a 2 tier system simply flexibility within the rules so not to restrict and discourage those with serious disabilities.
that one stuck out like a pimple on the end of my nose - quite appalled by the original statement
Agreed - having pre-conceived ideas and pre-judging is fundamentally wrong within a modern days society.
“More than enough inclusivity?” Bad wording, implying that our inclusivity should be reduced!
No no no. It implies that inclusivity is already addressed well beyond the bare minimum. I feel that to make a further concession to allow mobile operation change the character of the programme and actually remove a possible source of motivation and challenge for less able amateurs. It was a positive statement reflecting what I believe to be a positive aspect of our GR. I do not and would not support any reduction in the inclusivity we currently afford.
I think the current rules manage that fairly well
I agree. I also agree that proposals for individual or programme-wide concessions may be submitted to MT, and they would be considered on merit.
having pre-conceived ideas and pre-judging is fundamentally wrong
Nothing would ever start without a “preconceived idea” surely? And there’s no prejudice - these are discussion points that we have been bashing around in the SOTA community for 13 years, so the arguments and viewpoints are actually well-developed, rather than prejudged.
I find the suggestion made by your that we, the MT, may not be prepared to listen to input from disabled people particularly bloody insulting. As the father of a handicapped daughter, I’ve had 25 years dealing with other people’s preconceptions and significant exposure to all sorts of people with both physical and mental disabilities. In more recent times I’ve been exposed to people suffering from a range of mental health problems. I’m not the only MT member who is confronted with disability issues on a daily basis either.
What I have learnt from the past 25 years is that these disabled people are not asking for special rules, they’re not asking for exemptions. They’re asking to be treated exactly the same and given the same opportunities as everyone else.
In the case of SOTA we have had a fair number of requests from people with various disabilities at all levels asking how they can take part without breaking the rules. They’ve been concerned because they wanted to make sure their interpretation of the rules is valid. I can’t recall anyone asking for rules to be dropped or changed because of their disabilities. We have spent considerable effort writing eloquently vague sections of the rules so we don’t have to change things for people with disabilities. Such as “in the vicinty”. Time after time people ask what that means in metres or feet and we say that it depends. Some who is capable of running a marathon is expected to be a considerable distance from their car (physics of the summit excepted) where as for a wheelchair user this could be just a few feet. We take the view that disabled or not, everyone wants to do their best. Some people with disabilities are less than enamored that we are prepared to consider a less strenuous interpretation for them.
We’ve been doing this for nearly 14 years now and we’ve seen many requests for clarification. We’ve not needed to come up with any special dispensations or changes because we’ve been able to suggest something that even allows someone dependent on a motorised wheelchair to take part. However, there is a point when comes the fact that some things just are not possible. I say again, that so far as I can recall we’ve never had to say to anyone that they are just too disabled to take part. I’ve met a completely blind man wild walking on Hart Fell with 2 sighted helpers and his dog. There are no paths, just grass, bog, cleuchs, fences, holes, trip hazards.
So I respectfully suggest you wind your neck right in and consider that the people you are arguing with were more than happy to discuss and consider how your personal issues can be accommodated by the rules we have in place. But no, you need to play the hard done by.
Now as far as I am concerned this issue is closed.
[quote=“MM0FMF, post:70, topic:12774”]
I find the suggestion made by your that we, the MT, may not be prepared to listen to input from disabled people particularly bloody insulting
[/quote]Nobody needs to know what you find insulting here. Do the right thing and reply to the topic as an MT member and, hopefully, as a model to the rest of us as to how we should conduct ourselves on this forum. Do not forget that you are replying to a person of disability who is simply trying to ascertain how he might activate a summit without infringing on the rules. Try the best you can to aid and support him in this quest; not to upset him, to anger him, or to drive him away from SOTA.
This is quite simply an appalling thing to say! - and that from an MT member. Writing as a bystander, I would respectfully ask you to reconsider what you have said, and issue an apology, not only to the OP, but to others here who would find such remarks unfeeling, unsympathetic and downright insulting, as the case may be.
If it were me so badly affected I think I would just use my home station and leave it at that, as I will when I am too old to climb hills or drive and still want to enjoy my interest in SOTA. Chasing is just as much fun as activating!
We are (thankfully) all different while some will stop when their bodies tell them too, others will carry on and see the the physical challenge a spur to continue. We are all different and we all react to old age and infirmary in different ways.
Agreed I love it and I have learned a great deal this past 12 months doing it. Having reached my personal target I was looking for a new challenge to add on to chasing.
I have come to the conclusion, however, that sitting in my shack chasing will probably be less stressful.
I do both and fortunately for now I can still rise to the challenge, but it won’t be that way for ever that’s for sure. When life and limb is threatened it is time to give up and concentrate on chasing and things that involve less risk.
Thanks for the QSO we had from G/ NP-010on 28th December last.
Now no doubt Dave will add to what i am going to say and is most welcome.
I can see Dave and now learnt of his own disability certainly limits what he can do especially when it comes to activating summits. I can see he’s chomping at the bit to have a go and understanding why its one of those things you got to do if not at least once.
Changing of the rules i don’t see happening, but more likely to happen is a couple of people to get together and assist the said gent to the activation zone, one with easy reach of course or even join in a team effort. So he becomes part of a Sota team, again on a easy summit. Now doubt Dave would enjoy this during summer months when its warmer of course.
But advise any one doing this or taking this up to pay visit to Dave and let him get to know you to gain a trust. Then said party can set up the station & Dave gets positioned and joins in with out rules being broken.
The rules are set for what they are and makes Sota-ing more a challenge and we mostly abide by them. Its not rule changing we need but in Dave’s case assistance to be part of a team on easy summit.
Dave have to admire you for even taking up ham radio the way you did being deaf and blind let alone doing an activation. Good on you its your drive to get on keep it up.
I will deal with one first as it appears to be causing some problems.
NOWHERE within this thread have I asked for ANY rule to be changed for MY BENEFIT a fact already acknowledged by Andy in a previous post.
I don’t know therefore why the MT are getting frustrated with me on this point - but more on this later.
I asked, for clarification, about activating close to a car (and got it) as, quite simply, starting with an easy summit such as NW-070 would be a logical place to start. It is not only about confidence building but also about possibly taking several pieces of equipment and trying each one to see which works best. Lugging more gear up a challenging summit is unpractical but easy if a car was close by for storage.
While not guaranteed, a successful activation, would provide the inspiration to take the next step and increase the challenge bit by bit and only reaching the limit of balanced risk V the challenge.
Now let me deal with the specific challenge I face.
Confidence - Not seeing/knowing where you are can be quite unnerving - especially where the are potential hazards around - and there are many on summits.
Safety - Obviously, I would take/require a guide who not only would ensure my safety but would also need to ensure their own safety. As we all understand, safety on a hillside should be at the top of everyone’s priority list and I would need the confidence that a guide would ensure my safety. It is vital however that I also have the confidence that the guide will also look after their own safety needs as loosing the support of a guide to an injury would have additional implications for us both and any external support that was required.
An example of this actually happened last year. My wife and myself went up to Derbyshire and down the Blue Jon Mines.
We had all the safety talk about slip and overhead hazards and were fully understood. Right at the bottom of the cave there is an overhanging rock which my wife was trying to navigate me around when she slipped doing her ankle in.
The chaos this caused was immense, not only for the party we were with, but the group behind and the rescue team who had to carry her out and guide me out. Ambulance crew, trips to hospital, finding a way (many miles) back to our car after treatment and then driving home with an injury - not to mention paperwork and the immense embarrassment caused! - what a way to spend your 35 wedding anniversary. A painful lesson learned
Activating - It has taken some considerable time to establish operating practices that meet my needs (and obligation) and overcome the practical difficulties associated with sight loss and severe hearing difficulties. Hearing the QSO and ensuring that everything required is logged correctly and accurately has been challenging.
Doing this in a shack where I have control over my equipment and the environment is now a well practiced skill. But how do I translate this onto a hillside?
Obviously I would start with ease of operation in mind and channelised 2m is the logical place. Because of my hearing loss I would need isolation headphones for me to hear the chaser while keeping down outside noise such as the wind.
Obviously, I cannot log the QSO because of my sight loss so would require someone to do the logging for me. BUT how can they hear the QSO if I have isolation headphones on?
Before I even consider going on a hillside I need to find a solution whereby I can hear what is going on and the person(s) with me can also hear the TX/RX so that they can do the logging. I have found some suitable headset designed for noisy environments when used with PMR equipment. These are expensive, I would need 2 of these connected together and they would, probably need adapting - not something that I can do because I can’t solder! The other challenge in this respect is ensuring that they they would work with an HF rig too as that would be a natural progression.
Karl, as you can see from what I have written so far, rules changes are not required in my case and not requested. I was hoping to move on to equipment and adaptations later in the thread - but we got distracted. My request to clarify rules to activating from a car within the AZ was based on the the need to gain confidence and to have access to a range of equipment to see which works. The MT have clarified these rules and they are understood and accepted.
I have been overwhelmed by the offers of support (both here and in private) and I am moved by the care and consideration of the amateur radio community (including SOTA MT members) and I sincerely thank everyone.
Once I have sorted out what I need to successfully activate, I WILL have conversations with the many people who have offered to provide the hillside support in order that they understand what they are taking on
Thank you again Karl - I think you will understand that I am not afraid of a challenge and thrive on overcoming obstacles.
Finally, I feel that I must address one point which I believe has been misunderstood causing unnecessary and unwanted friction.
I apologies, if any of my posts have been misrepresented. The reason I started this thread was not purely for my benefit. Indeed, a request for a list of accessible summits was sought for everyone’s benefit in the hope of encouraging others to take up the challenge.
As I have stated in this particular post I wanted to move on and talk about equipment and potential modifications/adaptations that may or may not be required to help a wide range of disabilities.
When clarifying the rules on activation’s from a car park (or other suitable hard standing area) within the AZ the MT stated that this could be done, but not from a car - which is totally acceptable and understood. It was however pointed out that it could be done from a motorised wheelchair.
Those who have to most severe mobility difficulties often use class III wheelchairs which, it appears are acceptable to the MT and quite rightly so.
A class III motorized wheelchair however can ONLY (to the best of my understanding) be driven by someone who holds a full driving license, and the wheelchair is subject to the same rules and regulations - tax, insurance MOT - as a car. Essentially there is no difference between a car and a class III motorised wheelchair ???
NOTE - I do not hold a driving license (and never have) and therefore this is my understanding and is not based on in depth knowledge or experience.
I requested an opportunity to discuss this, off line and away from this forum, so that I could better understand the rules and a potential anomaly within the rules and their interpretation. NOT for my benefit, but for the benefit of those who use such a class of wheelchair.
My request was turned down flat.
I am of the opinion that it is always best to have an open minded discussion in order that it can be established IF an anomaly does exist and requires consideration and possible clarification - either way.
The final decision remains with the MT - whatever that may be - and I respect that. I do feel however that I have a right to raise the question in the first place.
As has often been said on this reflector, there are many aspects to Amateur Radio and there is something for everyone to partake in and enjoy. Limitations on account of a disability will vary, but I would say to Dave, give activating a go if you can. Offers of help have been made and I hope you take them up.
For any years I had a weekly high speed CW meteor scatter sked with Giuliano I3LGP and we usually completed the contact in around 20 minutes using random meteor trails. I took over the sked from Ian G4YUZ who had run the same with Giuliano for several years. Giuliano is totally without sight and to operate on the mode had to attain an exceptional level of skill. The usual set up in the 80’s was based around taping the incoming pings and bursts of signal and listening to them slowed down during the subsequent transmission period. Of course you had to find the position on the tape. Sending was usually by a small memory chip (mine was 1k of RAM) which had to be programmed while receiving so the outgoing message was ready for the next transmission period. The outgoing message changed as more information was received. None of the computerised modes of today. It was hard enough for me to operate the mode, let alone doing it without sight. Unfortunately we had to cease operations on account of a QTH move and never got back into having regular skeds, but we remain friends to this day.
The offers of help have been very encouraging. If I am able to find solutions to the technical problems, I will be talking to the many who have offered support with a view to activating - from somewhere nice and simple to start with!
it’s a complex subject. Just watch the Paralympics to get an idea of a. The fantastic capabilities and achievements of disabled people and b. The variation of levels and types of disabilities.
) - therefore why can’t they emerge at the summit of suitable hills (eg TW-004) to operate in the spirit of the rules?
