Mine, in Cape Town in the 1950s, was 'ZS1HK' -- that's a 'one' not an 'ell'
Don _______________ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery See New Pages 'The Cement Company from HELL!' Updated: August 15, 2003 "Oh my God! They've killed Teddy!" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super > > > graywolf wrote: > > > > Interesting, because they did not used to issue calls with O or I in them > > "because they were easily confused with 0 and 1" (FCC's statement, not mine). > > > > -- > > Tha's true. The only way they justify it now, I'm sure, is that all > amateurs know the U.S. call sign areas/regions are numbered from 1 to 9, > and any U.S. call only ever contains one single digit number. > That's one of those "they don't want to go there" situations. Can you > imagine the mess it would create, if they added another digit to the > call sign area designator? > > In fact, I don't find call signs all that easy to decipher anymore, as > the number of hams increase and the call signs are more inventive. > With some of the more recent ones, I'm not sure at a glance, whether > it's a U.S. call or not! It used to be, you could tell a U.S. call instantly. > Heavily populated call areas have gone thru a ton of prefixes, in order > to sort it all out! > California, for instance, started out with a W6. > Then it became a K6. Somewhere along the line, and I'm not sure of the > chronological sequence, they became WA6 and KA6's, then what? KB6's? > Add in the Advanced Amateur calls like N6 and such... What they did next > I simply don't know, but it's got to be a nightmare! <g> > > keith > > > > Bill Owens wrote: > > > > > Yes, they now issue vanity calls for a fee of something around $15.00 for > > > the 10 year term of the license. We also have another club member who still > > > holds his ca 1940s cal, W4OXH. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:22 PM > > > Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >>Bill Owens wrote: > > >> > > >>>Bet you $1.00 it's a vanity call. We have a club member, George Poteat, > > >>>K4GP. > > >>> > > >>>Bill > > >> > > >>Ahhh, that could be. I haven't kept up with call signs, NOR Amateur > > >>Radio in years and years... > > >>Used to be, an early call sign, a low number, meant the operator was in > > >>a long time. > > >>Issued as the applications came in. > > >>It may now be that unissued calls will go to the requisitioner, for a > > >>fee. . . > > >>Don't know. > > >> > > >>But, thanks for bringing it up. > > >> > > >>keith > > >> > > >>>----- Original Message ----- > > >>>From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 8:44 PM > > >>>Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>>Fred wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>>>4. It weighs slightly more. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>It's a bit taller, too. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Fred, K1FW <=== > > >>>> > > >>>>How many years have you had THAT one, Fred? > > >>>> > > >>>>_Great_ call sign! > > >>>> > > >>>>keith whaley > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > graywolf > > http://graywolfphoto.com > > > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." >
