[ct-user] Call KG4USK crashed CT-WIN
banzai at cei.net
Mon Nov 29 23:03:37 EST 2004
It appears that the FCC did in fact issue a large number 2x3 and few 2x1
calls out of the KG4 call block that were not in Gitmo. I am holding proof
of this in my formerly nicotine stained fingers in the form of a QSL card
sent to K5UZ on 23 Jun 2002, 03:22Z, 14MHz SSB from KG4OPC Rebekah Dorff,
QTH Hoover, Alabama; not Gitmo. Apparently the 2x2 block is for Gitmo by FCC
logic which is the same as a 1x2 = AA5GY or AD5AU and so forth, i.e., the
FCC does strange things with callsign allocations. It makes no sense, but
it doesn't have to in the world of the Federal Gov't.
73 David K5UZ
From: ct-user-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:ct-user-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Alan C. Zack
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 4:05 PM
To: k-zero-hb at earthlink.net
Cc: ct-user; Ken Brown
Subject: Re: [ct-user] Call KG4USK crashed CT-WIN
Hans, are you confusing KC4 with KG4?
In any case, why not block KG4 for only GITMO the same as KP1, KP2,
KP4 are not used in CONUS? With all the other prefixes available for
the 4th call district why use KG4 for CONUS and confuse things?
>>Any KG4 should be GITMO, period.
> No it shouldn't. GITMO has shared this prefix with Navy bases in
> Antarctica for about 45 years that I know about, and maybe longer.
> 73, de Hans, K0HB
Amateur Radio Station K7ACZ
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Quality Engineer, The Boeing Company, Retired
Aviation Chief Warrant Officer, U.S. Coast Guard, Retired
U.S. Coast Guard, Always Ready, Always There
Every hour, Every day, Around the Clock and Around the World
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
CT-User mailing list
CT-User at contesting.com
CT on the web: http://www.k1ea.com/
More information about the CT-User