[Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT - NEW qso RULES????

Sun Aug 24 16:34:44 CEST 2014

Wolfgang, how about you show me where it says the prefix MUST be
transmitted?  I have never seen such.

73, Russ K2TXB

-----Original Message-----
From: Wolfgang Schlaffer [mailto:dl5mae at yahoo.de] 
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 4:22 AM
To: Russ K2TXB
Cc: moon at moonbounce.info
Subject: RE: [Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT - NEW qso RULES????

Hi Russ, 

please just give me  the  SOURCE  where  you get the info that  due to  NEW
RULES its  ENOUGH  TO SHORTEN THE CALLSIGNS down to the PREFIX OR SUFFIX (or
whatever??) .  I dont  find anything  on  www.  ...I was "googling" now for
at least one hour but dont find these NEW  rules. 

I just dont understand if I call someone  without my prefix  (i.e. only MAE)
how he can understand that I am DL5MAE  and not someone else...

Or how  someone  knows where I am if I leave the prefix away  i.e. active as
VP2M/DL5MAE  ...and only TX DL5MAE ... this will not be a valid callsign
while beeing in Montserrat (in this example). 

By the way, here is a source I did find in THE INTERNATIONAL AMATEUR RADIO
UNION REGION 1 VHF MANAGERS HANDBOOK, which states " A valid contact is one
where both operators have copied both callsigns, the report  and an
unambigous comfirmation. However, no recourse should be made during the
contact to obtain the required information, chance of frequency ( ? ) ,
antenna direction (?), , etc. via other methods such as DXCluster, talk-back
an another band, etc. 
Such secondary methods invalidate the meteor scatter (*) contact. In
essence: if anything concerning  the ongoing QSO attempt is agreed through
other means than the QSO attempt frequency a new start is required. 

* = I adapt these rules also for EME , as EME has the same procedure

? = This part I dont understand (= in my opinion it has to be  DELETED from
the rules !  ) 

vy 73 de DL5MAE Wolfgang

--------------------------------------------
Russ K2TXB <k2txb at dxcc.com> schrieb am Sa, 23.8.2014:

 Betreff: RE: [Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT - NEW qso RULES????
 An: "'Wolfgang Schlaffer'" <dl5mae at yahoo.de>
 CC: moon at moonbounce.info
 Datum: Samstag, 23. August, 2014 23:18 Uhr

 Well Wolfgang you did not
 need to extend what I said so as to imply I meant
 that "everyone could send what they
 wanted".  If the station sends just his
 call without the prefix and that is copied and
 returned then that is what
 the QSO rules
 call for.  Nowhere does it say that full prefixes or
 suffixes
 must be sent and received.  Indeed
 it is common practice in this country for
 portable stations to NOT identify the fact that
 they are portable in
 contests.  Rovers are
 a different story because of contest logging
 requirements, but portables usually don't
 spend much time saying "portable
 2" or whatever.  There is no rule that
 they must identify that way in the
 contest,
 or from the government for that matter.

 So again, if the guy sends his call (without
 suffixes or prefixes) and it is
 received and
 sent back successfully, then a contact has been made and
 most
 people will believe that, including
 people managing contests and awards.
 And if
 the station identifies himself with the call plus prefix in
 a regular
 fashion (but not with every
 contact), that is sufficient for legal
 requirements too.

 That is all I said before and all I am saying
 now.  I am not saying that I
 could send a
 different call than my own, or my name, or whatever and
 it
 would valid.  No, but if I send K2TXB
 and the station answers K2TXB then
 everyone
 knows he is working me, and there is no reason why it is not
 a
 valid contact.

 73, Russ K2TXB

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Wolfgang Schlaffer [mailto:dl5mae at yahoo.de] 
 Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2014 12:58 PM
 To: Russ K2TXB
 Cc: moon at moonbounce.info
 Subject: RE: [Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT - NEW
 qso RULES????

 Hi Russ, 

 thats completly  NEW  to 
 me  that  the  rules  have  changed  this
 way...!!! 

 So
 that means everybody  is  allowed  to TX  what he wants
 ?!?! 

 I wonder when and
 where and who  (@ IARU meeting???)  established this 
 NEW
 rules ????

 Perhaps you like to answer this question to me,
 please!!! 

 I will 
 NOT   go along this  way  and  will work along
 the OLD  rules, which
 say: 

 BOTH stations need to 
 RX:   both callsigns / reports /  and QSO
 confirmation (like: RRR) 

 tnx es vy 73 de DL5MAE - Wolfgang

 --------------------------------------------
 Russ K2TXB <k2txb at dxcc.com>
 schrieb am Sa, 23.8.2014:

 Betreff: RE: [Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT

 An: "'Wolfgang Schlaffer'" <dl5mae at yahoo.de>,
 "'Lars Pettersson'"
 <sm4ive at telia.com>
  CC: moon at moonbounce.info
  Datum: Samstag, 23. August, 2014 18:16 Uhr

  Wolfgang, the QSO rules
  are to copy the call that was sent, not
 necessarily  the full legal call. 
 So
 those contacts are  all valid for QSO.  They might  not
 be quite  legal,
 for federal license bureau
 purposes, but that does  not  concern us any more
 than if the station  was running power over
 the legal  limit.  I  have never
 heard
 anyone say that EME contacts were void  because a  guy was
 running too
 much power!

  Further to that, even though

 the 4K/PA3CMC call may not have been fully  transmitted via
 JT65, I am
 pretty sure it was  transmitted
 every 10 minutes  via the CW ID.
  This
 solves the legal question too.  You may want to  dispute 
 my first
 sentence, but I think if  you
 examine the full context the only  conclusion
 must be that the QSO rules have been  met.

  73, Russ K2TXB

  -----Original
 Message-----
  From: Moon [mailto:moon-bounces at moonbounce.info]
  On Behalf Of Wolfgang

 Schlaffer
  Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014
 5:27 PM
  To: Lars Pettersson
  Cc: moon at moonbounce.info
  Subject: [Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT

  ARE THESE THE NEW  QSO
 RULES
  SET  UP  BY  K1JT  ? 
  IN THE GIVEN
  EXAMPLE 
 PA3CMC  never  TX  the  4K-prefix  and  IN  MIDDLE
 OF  THE  QSO 
 THE  COUNTRY  OF 
 UT6UA  IS  CHANCED FROM  AZERBADJAN  TO   UKRAINE
 ....!!! 
 I NEVER WONT  CONSIDER  THIS
 AS  A  COMPLETE  QSO! !!! 

  73 de DL5MAE Wolfgang

 --------------------------------------------
  Lars Pettersson <sm4ive at telia.com>
  schrieb am Fr, 22.8.2014:

  Betreff: Re: [Moon] The
 Swedish 4Th 432 & UP EME meeting  CW

 An: "Bernd DF2ZC" <df2zc1 at googlemail.com>
   CC: moon at moonbounce.info
   Datum: Freitag, 22. August, 2014 15:11
 Uhr

     As a follow up to
 your previoues email.

      There are
  lots of information on
 internet how a QSO  should be

    performed to be able to
  count as a
 QSO

    Both callsings should be sent and Report  and 
 confirmation of

    report. AKA RRRR

      That i belive we could agree

 on?

       Despite this
  rules  many dont follow this rules  and 
 even  MR
       Almighty JT himself
 encourage
  not to send the complete  call 
 becouse

     the JT
 software cant handle long calls.

       http://mailman.pe1itr.com/pipermail/moon-net/2014-June/020725.html

       So Bernd
  DF2ZC    is this QSO in above link  OK

    if you should follow
  the rules???????
 NO ITS NOT  you could

    compare it with if i call you with 2ZF de  sm4ive 
 is this a
       QSO????

 NO NO NO        

     I still expecting an serioues
 answer in this  matter.

     No In Sweden we
 have not Blown up houses or  Killed  peoples since
       1600
  th centuary 

     Lars SM4IVE

       CW is King

   -----Integrierter
 Anhang
  folgt-----

 _______________________________________________
   Moon mailing list
   Moon at moonbounce.info
   http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon

 _______________________________________________
  Moon mailing list
  Moon at moonbounce.info
  http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon