RX9TX continued:
> >>What about RA3CO he still persists he was told he can use station's
> >>owner call from the very first operation, and I see no reason for
> >>disbelief.
> >
> > Then RA3CO can produce something in writing from the Colombian
> > authorities to support his claim. So far he has not & the Colombian
> > authorities instead have said he was not licensed. QED, I think.
>
>Well, If I come to the USA and operate someone's station with the
>licence owner sitting in the chair next to me and supervising my
>operation I still do not need "something in writing" to prove my
>operation was legitimate. It's the licence holder responsibilities,
>not mine.
The scenario you talk about in USA is no different than with
any other unlicensed individual. The unlicensed person
could never operate the station in the full sense & what you
could do is subject to third-party traffic restrictions (limits
what countries could be worked). The supervision required
means there are, for the contest, two operators, so no
unlicensed person in USA will ever be able to submit a
single-op contest entry.
> >>What about other Russians, the answer seems obvious - they get
> >>temporary licences.
> >
> > How? Your country I doubt has many reciprocal agreements & none of
> > your citizens can use CEPT in any country to operate. That limits
> > you to those places that look at an amateur licence from somewhere &
> > satisfy itself as all countries' licensing requirements stem from
> > ITU-RR, they say okay, as our license also based on those
> > requirements, we issue one of ours as you have one from home. VR
> > does this. It looks like EA does this. There are undoubtedly others.
>
>I think those limits are wider than they seem, you don't need to be in
>CEPT or have reciprocal agreements to operate from most of the Europe.
>YOu can still file your personal application and get your temporary
>licence like in old days. At least thats what I was told by SM6LRR.
I used to be the president of our national society, over a
period where we lost all basis we ever had for licensing
other-than-sitting-our-exam for those coming to our shores &
all basis we had for being able to operate ourselves abroad
(not unlike situation for Russians it seems right now). My
familiarity with this subject is rather good.
There are reciprocal agreements, CEPT & IARP. CEPT has
added a type of document to facilitate this recognition concept,
called HAREC. That's all, leaves only administrations creative
enough to get their heads around this recognition thing on their
own without something like HAREC.
>What about real DX places in Africa, Asia or Pacific or anywhere else
>outside of CEPT personal application for sure is the only way for
>anyone.
In addition to operators operating from places where one
might wonder how they managed get licensed, there are
places where it might be expected that proof of legitimacy
be required of other entrant demographics.
> > Wrong. Under CEPT & with a US licence _and_ US citizenship, then one
> > can operate from the bits of F that F has extended CEPT to, which
> > according to what F told ERO includes bits above that you say are
> > not covered. Norway allows CEPT in JW but not JX. Of that list, I
> > believe only 3Y & ZB are not possible with CEPT. Please, these are
> > facts, get them straight OM.
>
>Need to check it again, not all the bits of F as far as I know.
Yes, do: http://www.erodocdb.dk/docs/doc98/official/pdf/TR6101.PDF
73, ex-VR2BG/p.
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|