Wouldn't it be what type of license FJ allowed, not OH ??? Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: GERRY To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 8:18 PM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms
It's clear that OH2AM is a club call and therefore Class C. call name address zip city class @sral.fi email OH0B OH0R OH2R OH0AM OH2AM OH-DX-Ring Ry PL 73 02381 ESPOO C http://oh-callbook.sral.fi/?call=oh2am&name=&addr=&zip=&city=&class=&lang=EN It's clear that the CEPT regulations does not include class C in their OH allowed CEPT users. Appendix 2: http://www.ero.dk/doc98/Official/Word/TR6101E.DOC Gerry VE6LB ----- Original Message ----- From: Zack Widup To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 5:00 PM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: > A very interesting document. > > I noticed that one item appeared to be missing... when the first complaints > surfaced, one of the "charges" was that of possibly illegal entry to FJ via > a privately chartered boat, as I recall. No mention of that in the letter. > As a certain fictional television character used to say, "Fascinating." > > The charge over the alleged misuse of the club callsign for the DXpedition > is probably the most serious complaint. But as meticulous as Martti usually > is on planning his jaunts, I find it hard to believe that this detail was > overlooked. And, of course, nobody's perfect, so it may have been a true > oversight on his part. > I wondered about that myself. As you said, "Fascinating!" > But... was a license issued, and if so, what call was on it? If FJ/OH2AM > was on the license -- does that make the operation invalid? I'm sure that's > one of the things the DXAC and DXCC desk will get to iron out, a task I > don't envy them. > I was under the impression that as a CEPT country, anyone from another CEPT country could just go there and operate. I could just go and operate as FJ/W9SZ. The main contention seems to be now about the callsign used after the "FJ/". > Having said that... I've got to tell you, gang, that this is one of a string > of disturbing precedents that we've seen over the last few years. Sort of a > DX'ing version of NIMBY. Recall all the complaints from the HP hams over > the H8A trip a few years back, for one (specifically over the actual call on > the license)? And there have been others along the same lines, which many > of you know much more about than I ever will. > > I can't blame some of the resident FJ hams from feeling that their triumph > got trumped, that their own plans to "inaugurate" the new entity in their > own way got pulled out from under them. Under similar circumstances, I > might feel the same way. But whatever happened (I ask rhetorically) to good > sportsmanship? > > 73, ron w3wn > So where are they? Why aren't they doing a similar operation when they know how much in demand the entity still is? 73, Zack W9SZ Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org