Message-ID: <$BHKhpDAFMFHFwpr@g4dmp.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:48:48 +0100
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
From: David Pratt <david@g4dmp.co.uk>
References: <000701c80e86$d700cea0$48e4fc3e@g3kev>
 <338459.59210.qm@web28106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
 <20071014193031.07a5ae31@lurcher.twatt.local>
 <20071014231737.jr38sns9bio8s4kg@webmail.versatel.de>
 <003c01c80f53$ab27e5c0$70e4fc3e@g3kev> <0Xyo0YAVyKFHFwoO@g4dmp.fsnet.co.uk>
 <4714BDA7.8030908@sighthound.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4714BDA7.8030908@sighthound.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.06-U (<rsW2jKajPcuxbUxWoBAfFt1SVd>)
Subject: Re: LF: MF acty
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


In a recent message, John GM4SLV <gm4slv@sighthound.demon.co.uk> wrote 
...
>David Pratt wrote:
>
>> The definition of a Beacon is in clause 17(g) of the Amateur Licence 
>>and  is covered by clause 10 and Schedule 2.
>
>Oh and I forgot.... a beacon is (as defined) "automatic transmitting 
>only Radio Equipment"... I guess then if there's a receiver capable (as 
>required in the regs) of receiving on the frequency of transmission, in 
>the mode of transmission then it can't be a "beacon" as defined.

I am sure you're right, John.  The use of the word "Beacon" is a 
misnomer in this context and should be referred to as CQ (or initial) 
calls. Granted, there are countries that only permit operation of 
beacons on 500kHz and not participation in 2-way communications.

Looking forward to working you when I have improved my antenna system.

73

David
-- 
+----------------------------------+
| David M Pratt, Kippax, Leeds, UK |
| Homepage: http://www.g4dmp.co.uk |
+----------------------------------+