[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Callsigns & People

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Callsigns & People
From: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>
Reply-to: vo1he@rac.ca
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 13:32:48 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
When I was first licenced in 1990, my licence showed my name, qualifications
and the address where my main station was located. We were permitted to have
one permanent, one mobile and one portable station under the station
licence. That included operating someone else's station as my own. When I
was president of a local club, I had to stipulate the locations of each of
the club stations and repeaters for the licence information. Since Industry
Canada changed the method by which amateurs are licenced in Canada, now my
'Certificate of Proficiency in Amateur Radio' only shows my name,
qualifications and the callsigns that I am authorized to use. There is no
longer any mention of station location. I never had to own any equipment or
have an operational station to have a callsign but now our qualifications
are in place for life.

I have always considered myself as being VO1HE and my station being VO1HE's
station. I can be VO1HE (portable) anywhere in the world but anyone can
operate my station as themselves (portable).

73 -- Paul VO1HE  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of 
> Rowland.Archer@gxs.com
> Sent: December 7, 2007 17:40
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Callsigns & People
> John W3BE, who spent 27 years at the FCC has a very good 
> explanation of this topic in his Rules & Regs column in the 
> Dec 2007 WorldRadio.  You can find much, but not all, of the 
> same information on his website at 
> http://home.att.net/~w3be/.  Check out "Which Call Sign."  
> Several other topics are also relevant including Station ID 
> and Club Station.
> Of course, this may not be accurate for amateur operation not 
> regulated by the FCC.
> In his WR article, he makes the point that the station 
> license is analogous to a vehicle registration, while the 
> amateur operator license is analogous to a driver's license.  
> For the amateur service, under 97.5(b)(1), both the operator 
> license and the station license are shown on the same grant.
> John uses precise language to define how these concepts 
> apply, along with the concept of control operator, so I'm not 
> going to repeat any more of it here, for fear I will mangle 
> it and cause more confusion than good.  It has taken me a few 
> readings but the various scenarios are becoming more clear to me.
> In the simplest case (which so far has covered 100% of my 
> operating), where I, with only one station and operator 
> license grant and callsign, operate my own station under 
> those grants, there is no ambiguity.  But as soon as you go 
> beyond that case, there are decisions to make about which 
> callsign to use, who is the control operator, etc.  And John 
> makes it clear that if you don't consciously make those 
> decisions, you could be assuming you don't have 
> accountability for the operation of your station when in fact 
> you do.  Or you may inadvertently allow your station to be 
> used in a way that violates the rules.
> As evidenced by the discussion here, this area can be a 
> little tricky to understand -- but it is so fundamental to 
> what we do, it seems like understatement to say it is "worth 
> studying!"
> 73,
> Rowland K4XD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob Davis
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 10:09 AM
> To: reflector cq-contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Callsigns & People
> However, an inconceivably large number of electrons was 
> terribly inconvenienced.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Coslo" <mjc5@psu.edu>
> To: "reflector cq-contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 8:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] QSL ethics
> >
> > On Dec 5, 2007, at 5:49 PM, K0HB wrote:
> >
> > > Good point.  People don't have call signs.  Radio 
> stations have call 
> > > signs.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Is there a good online reference for this? I've always had a few 
> > questions on that matter, and would love to see the total 
> rationale, 
> > since an exact reading of it would imply that a person without a 
> > station would not be licensed - and that isn't the case.
> >
> > Looked through part 97 a bit and didn't see anything definitive.
> I've always held that people are licensed and the station 
> holds the callsign.  Look at it from the broadcast 
> perspective - an entity, whether a singular person or a 
> corporation - is licensed to operate a station.  For example, 
> the Central Pennsylvania Broadcasting Company owned and 
> operated a 5kw AM broadcast station, the callsign of which 
> was WKVA. To the best of my knowledge, neither a particular 
> person nor the company itself was licensed as WKVA; the 
> company had a license to *operate* WKVA.  (Note: I could be 
> misremembering; it's been ten years since I was involved with that
> enterprise.)
> Thus, I see it that R P Davis has a license to operate an 
> amateur radio station called NQ3X.  Another person I 
> designate could operate my station and use that callsign. 
> Happens all the time with special event stations, club 
> stations and multi-operator contest stations - and even 
> sometimes in single-op roles, where I might lend my WPX-savvy 
> call to a regular ol' W3.
> That said, we as a hobby tend to use our callsigns as 
> personal identifiers, since they - generally speaking - are 
> issued to a singular person, not an entity (club calls and 
> special event calls notwithstanding).  There aren't many 
> people who would recognize the name Bob Davis, even in my 
> local club; many more, comparatively speaking, will recognize 
> my callsign.
> Tangentially, this is an interesting onomastic exercise. One 
> could argue that ham radio callsigns serve the same purpose 
> as locative, familial or occupational bynames in past 
> cultures.  A fellow named Will from the town of Crecy becomes 
> Guillaume d'Crecy; Will's son, who puts stones on top of each 
> other, becomes known as Tom Mason. In turn, Tom's son might 
> be known as Jack Tomson (locative, occupational, and familial 
> respectively). In the same manner do we assign further 
> onomastic identifiers through the conjunctive use of our 
> callsigns - thus, we are Tim Duffy and Mike Coslo as well as 
> Tim, K3LR and Mike, N3LI or even just K3LR and N3LI.
> You've made me think.  I'll be wary of you in the future. ;-)
> Bob NQ3X (See!?)
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>