As I understand it, cut numbers are only used where there's no ambiguity. There is certainly ambiguity possible in callsigns, and I don't think anyone has advocated using cut numbers there. And suggesting that is obfuscating the issue.
But when giving a signal report or sending the zone as part of an simple contest exchange, cut numbers are certainly appropriate. And any CW operator should be aware of them. Complaining about it is like complaining about words not being spelled out fully and properly when having a ragchew or even spelling and grammar flames on net postings. 73, doug Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 11:29:58 -0800 From: "Leigh L Klotz, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The ID question is interesting. I know that CW holds a special place, but there is no out-of-mode ID requirement for digital modes such as PSK, as long as the modulation is publicly described. CW is a digital mode no matter whether it is Morse or International Morse or Japanese Kana Code, ergo there *ought* to be no CW ID requirement for "International Morse with T instead of 0" as long as there is no intent to obscure communications, merely to facilitate it. Ought to, but I doubt that OOs will see it that way because of the strong position of International Morse Code for CW. And I suspect the FCC would not like to have us bring them such problems either. Leigh. On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 11:20 am, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > I'd bet if you asked the FCC if it was legal to use "cut numbers" for > your call sign you'd find that you are asking for a citation for > failing to > identify properly. _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
