[Moon] QSO procedure by K1JT - NEW qso RULES????
Chuck Smallhouse
w7cs at theriver.com
Sun Aug 24 18:46:00 CEST 2014
Years ago It was in the EME Contest rules that you were obligated to
send full calls including any portable indicators. They may have
since wavered the rule . I think this one of the reasons that Lance,
now W7GJ, changed from his WA1/7 call.
W7CS
At 07:34 AM 8/24/2014, Russ K2TXB wrote:
>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
More information about the Moon
mailing list