I’m not enough in-the-know to wish to venture any specific comments on the recently canceled P5 North Korea DXpedition. I do know how hard it is to keep secrets secret even when everyone involved has security clearances, so I must commend the group for how little did leak out for such a long time.
Unfortunately second and third hand accounts did leak, and bloggers chose to run to print, strangely never reaching out to fact check, which if they had the need for no advanced press would have been reaffirmed.
The disconnect between the needs to fundraise and news blackout perhaps could never have been met.
But more importantly should dangerous DX be part of our DXCC program?
Should our DXCC program be tweaked to “suspend” accreditation for other than local residents of an area in a declared state of war? P5 has been for sixty plus years.
Should our DXCC program be tweaked to exclude moonscapes that are uninhabitable?
While accounts of winds so strong we formed a human wall wearing our cold weather survival suits inside the tent as we weather the night seems to cross the line between calculated adventure and needlessly shaking the dice.
Now there is a certain rush a good adventure brings, and I am not immune.
But to be certain a fair number of these dangerous DXpeditions exist largely because of the encouragement hams intending to stay safe at home.
Is that six second QSO really worth it?
Most likely there is no good solution, and it isn’t like anyone forces these DXpeditions to happen.
Maybe there is another way to develop an acceptable risk policy for DXCC, but the one thing I do know is that our current policy violates a personal life rule – I will never ask anyone to take a risk I wouldn’t take personally myself. We’re way past that line and I can not think of a reason why it could be possibly worth it.
73
Steve
K9ZW
