Ed, K4SB, makes several good points here. But in my view of things, the
P5 RTTY operation is just like his SSB operation was before he received
anything like "proof of license". It may be counted later (hope so).
I have 14 7O QSO's in my log and none of them count - that hurts
considering I need only 7O & VU4 to have them all. I worked Ed
P5/4L4FN last night (finally) on SSB. He was S5 here in Louisiana and
several W5 landers got through the JA's and EU. It was just one of
those weird deals and it was at 0550Z, nearly 1 a.m. local time. I was
so fired up I couldn't sleep for two more hours. hi
I don't think the Yemen operations will ever be approved. I think Ed
must have obtained some sort of piece of paper granting him permission
to operate SSB. Apparently he didn't have that earlier. He still could
get another piece of paper for RTTY and CW. We can only hope.
Regardless, it's a major breakthrough from that country and very welcomed.
Just my .02 worth.
73, Don AA5AU
----- Original Message -----
From: "K4SB" <k4sb@mindspring.com>
To: <RTTY@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] QUESTION.
> AMeyer3565@aol.com wrote:
>
> > NOW THAT THE ARRL HAS OKAYED P5 FOR SSB ONLY, I THINK THE ARRL SHOULD TAKE A
> > OTHER LOOK AT THE YEMEN STATIONS THAT THEY HAVE REFUSED.
> > WHAT DO YOU THINK
> >
> > 73 ES DX...ALEX.... W6ZX
> ---------------------------------
>
> I belive Alex is on the ball here. But, also don't think it will ever
> happen. If you read the current ARRL announcement regarding its OK for
> SSB ( but not RTTY ) and then read the 7O version, you will find very
> marked differences in the wording. For example, in previous OKs,
> you'll always see "proof of license received", and similar remarks.
>
> There is absolutely no doubt that the 7O operation was "approved by
> local authorities and was done with their full knowledge". Why then is
> it different from the P5?
>
> This announcement takes me back to the mid 60s when Don Miller had
> several of his trips trashed because he was refusing to work the "old
> boys top of the honor roll" which existed at that time. Now if I could
> work him with a Heathkit running 100 watts to a TA-33 Jr., you can
> damn well believe he could hear those KW W1s calling.
>
> It is also interesting that the ARRL is sanctioning an operator who,
> according to them, is willfully violating the terms of his license by
> operating RTTY.
>
> The whole thing smells of politics and pressure. But again, it isn't
> the first time.
>
> 73
> Ed
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|