This is one of those willful fabrications of gray areas that clutter rule discussions. This is why nobody discusses "remote bases" in polite company anymore.
With all due respect, Larry, your "ONE QUESTION" is a test unrelated to what the rule says. The rule itself says it applies to the additional self-assigned identifier separated by the "/", so the question is the conflict posed by "R," not "/R." If the "/" was included in the conflict test, there would be no reason for the rule, since no country is allocated "/" or other non-alphanumerics as part of its national call letter pool. Nothing in the rule limits "conflict" to the amateur service. If another country has the authorization under international treaty to give broadcasters, ships at sea, or long-range baby monitors a callsign beginning with (or consisting of) "R," we can't legally use it following a "/". Sure, it's a one-size-fits-all rule, but what's new? Mike, thanks for pointing this out. Good amateur practice would suggest the shortest legal repeater ID regardless, to reduce the time you're occupying the spectrum. If the "/R" is not required, why would anyone use it? To distinguish the repeater from all the other Morse chatter you hear on 2m FM? Do you hold the contract to supply the 1N34 diodes used in Hamtronics matrix boards? Then, why? (BTW, that's a rhetorical question. My last repeater's polite ID signed /R, even though I knew it wasn't required. If I'm being honest, after all the hassle of getting a pair, negotiating a site and building the thing, it brought me great pleasure to hear my callsign followed by Morse for "repeater." If there's any other reason for hanging onto "/R" I'd love to hear it.) If you're really willing to fight to give up the "R," what about other separators? If you leave a between-word space before the "R," or even before a "/R," have you made it part of your callsign? Lots of repeater IDs include a city, PL frequency, or other information in their IDs, separated by a space from the callsign itself. We may have something here! All that said, Larry, I don't think you're in danger of an imminent enforcement action. The FCC doesn't have time to chase violations that draw no complaints. In fact, in the current political environment, if the Russians made a fuss, the feds would probably enjoy it. If the FCC starts cracking down on 10-codes used on 2m, maybe worry then. Maybe, since they're all unassigned, we could use one of the non-alphanumeric Morse characters to mean "repeater." ". - . . ." might be appropriate on machines inhabited by users who make you wait forever to join the morning commute roundtable. ". . - - . ." might be appropriate for repeaters which are never used, but sit there taking up a pair. " - - - . . . " if the repeater licensee is a real butt-head, etc. RIP, Horse. If anyone finds an example of when this rule has been enforced, that would be interesting! Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm running late for my spark-gap sked with a guy from Guam. We agreed to meet on 20, 30 and 40 meters at the same time. Yeah, I know what the rule says, but I think I've concocted a plausible loophole, and I really hate change... 73, Paul, AE4KR ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Wagoner To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 440 Repeater Project Ask yourself this *ONE* question. Is /R the way Russian stations identify themselves? No? Then it is NOT an ASSIGNED identifier, nor is it an attempt to confuse or hide identity. .
