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

Lars Pettersson sm4ive at telia.com
Sun Aug 24 17:00:26 CEST 2014


The way you talk Russ  means i can call you  2TXB   and delete the 
Prefix  right.
So from now on lets skip the prefix.
Lars Sm4IVE

Russ K2TXB skrev 2014-08-24 16:34:
> 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
>    
>    
>   
>   
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moon mailing list
> Moon at moonbounce.info
> http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon
>
>

-- 
I only work real EME no chatts no Bagpipes
CW is King!!!!



More information about the Moon mailing list