Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+callsign\/callsign\s+DQ\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+callsign\/callsign\s+DQ\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Mike Smith VE9AA" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:59:10 -0400; Is USACALL/USACALL even a valid "callsign" to send out over the air, ever? (nevermind trying to determine if this person should be DQ'd or not) I mean, if I was operating at a buddies station in Nova; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00111.html (7,768 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Hank Garretson <w6sx@arrl.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:16:27 -0800; Is USACALL/USACALL even a valid "callsign" to send out over the air, ever? ARRL Pacific Director W6RGG says it is valid. WE2ASS/NY6DX is the FCC directed identification for a lower class licensee Con; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00116.html (7,854 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:32:12 -0500; WE2ASS/NY6DX is the FCC directed identification for a lower class licensee to operate outside their assigned frequencies, using the call sign of the higher class licensee acting as the control operat; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00117.html (10,065 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Ryan Noguchi via RTTY <rtty@contesting.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:41:05 +0000 (UTC); Yes, for US-licensed amateurs. See below for the reference in Part 97: §97.119 Station identification. (e) When the operator license class held by the control operator exceeds that of the station; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00118.html (8,155 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Jeffrey Smith <n5tit.tx@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:46:40 +0000; Lookup WE2ASS up on 3830scores.com. I think part of the anwser is in the comments. 73 de Jeffrey N5TIT _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lis; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00119.html (8,795 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Ryan Noguchi via RTTY <rtty@contesting.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:51:21 +0000 (UTC); I think that explains what was going on, not VE9AA's question about its legality. 73, Ryan AI6DO Yes, for US-licensed amateurs. See below for the reference in Part 97: §97.119 Station identificat; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00120.html (8,753 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Ryan Noguchi via RTTY <rtty@contesting.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:54:42 +0000 (UTC); carefully and disqualified if any prohibited third party communication is discovered. If the entry is single operator by NY6DX it's probably OK (except for the "unstable call"). That was a Multi-Si; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00121.html (8,798 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Mike Smith VE9AA" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:58:36 -0400; I asked if it was VALID, not legal. I hear all kinds of stuff I know is not legal. Seems it is (both), but guess I had never heard it before. Learn something every day. Recall, its someone else (and; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00122.html (9,952 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "John Barber" <john@bordertech.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:07:55 -0500; carefully and disqualified if any prohibited third party communication is discovered. If the entry is single operator by NY6DX it's probably OK (except for the "unstable call"). That was a Multi-Sing; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00123.html (9,169 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Jim W7RY" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 19:36:14 -0600; This format is used when a licensee does not have the privileges (WE2ASS is a technician and cant run RTTY on HF) is at a station that does have privileges. I used to do it all the time at a friends; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00127.html (9,444 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Jim W7RY" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 19:39:07 -0600; Problem is Hank is that he originally started the contest just sending WE2ASS. No other call was used. And agreed... That is the proper way to do it. See my earlier post where I used to do it as a No; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00128.html (10,004 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: "Jim W7RY" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 19:44:45 -0600; Fine... But his son doesn't have the privileges. And he started out using just his call... Which was actually against FCC regulations/illegal. His intentions were noble.... But slightly misguided. 73; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00129.html (10,034 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] callsign/callsign DQ (score: 1): Author: Stu Phillips <stu@k6tu.net>; Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 01:47:57 +0000; Worry not! Although I dont have experience with the log checking software used in WPX, I understand that logs are scored based on their stability a log which causes multiple busts in other logs gets; /archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00130.html (9,921 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]