At 4/12/2009 16:45, you wrote: >It doesn't have to be 'recognizable' (at least I never saw any such >wording in the rules).
But it does need to be some sort of amateur communications. Bob NO6B
At 4/12/2009 16:45, you wrote: >It doesn't have to be 'recognizable' (at least I never saw any such >wording in the rules).
But it does need to be some sort of amateur communications. Bob NO6B