Wouldn't it be what type of license FJ allowed, not OH ???
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: GERRY
To: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms
It's clear that OH2AM is a club call and therefore Class C.
call name address zip city class @sral.fi email
OH0B OH0R OH2R OH0AM OH2AM OH-DX-Ring Ry PL 73 02381 ESPOO C
http://oh-callbook.sral.fi/?call=oh2am&name=&addr=&zip=&city=&class=&lang=EN
It's clear that the CEPT regulations does not include class C in their OH
allowed CEPT users.
Appendix 2: http://www.ero.dk/doc98/Official/Word/TR6101E.DOC
Gerry VE6LB
----- Original Message -----
From: Zack Widup
To: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 5:00 PM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
> A very interesting document.
>
> I noticed that one item appeared to be missing... when the first
complaints
> surfaced, one of the "charges" was that of possibly illegal entry to FJ
via
> a privately chartered boat, as I recall. No mention of that in the
letter.
> As a certain fictional television character used to say, "Fascinating."
>
> The charge over the alleged misuse of the club callsign for the DXpedition
> is probably the most serious complaint. But as meticulous as Martti
usually
> is on planning his jaunts, I find it hard to believe that this detail was
> overlooked. And, of course, nobody's perfect, so it may have been a true
> oversight on his part.
>
I wondered about that myself. As you said, "Fascinating!"
> But... was a license issued, and if so, what call was on it? If FJ/OH2AM
> was on the license -- does that make the operation invalid? I'm sure
that's
> one of the things the DXAC and DXCC desk will get to iron out, a task I
> don't envy them.
>
I was under the impression that as a CEPT country, anyone from another
CEPT country could just go there and operate. I could just go and operate
as FJ/W9SZ. The main contention seems to be now about the callsign used
after the "FJ/".
> Having said that... I've got to tell you, gang, that this is one of a
string
> of disturbing precedents that we've seen over the last few years. Sort
of a
> DX'ing version of NIMBY. Recall all the complaints from the HP hams over
> the H8A trip a few years back, for one (specifically over the actual call
on
> the license)? And there have been others along the same lines, which many
> of you know much more about than I ever will.
>
> I can't blame some of the resident FJ hams from feeling that their triumph
> got trumped, that their own plans to "inaugurate" the new entity in their
> own way got pulled out from under them. Under similar circumstances, I
> might feel the same way. But whatever happened (I ask rhetorically) to
good
> sportsmanship?
>
> 73, ron w3wn
>
So where are they? Why aren't they doing a similar operation when they
know how much in demand the entity still is?
73, Zack W9SZ
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat
To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org
This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA
http://njdxa.org
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat
To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org
This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA
http://njdxa.org
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat
To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org
This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA
http://njdxa.org
