Hi Ray!

Yep, the license held is what governs the privilege, not a body's location
nor circumstancial convenience.

Of course, if you have an agreement with a remote owner that satisfies both
parties, that is OK too. 

73,
Dave 

-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Ray T. Mahorney
Sent: Tuesday, 2 February 2016 1:01 p.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: CEPT, and remote hams question

just to expand as I also hold a UK call I think CEPT would only come into
play if I were to operate outside the UK under either call.  


Ray T. Mahorney
WA4WGA
M0WGA


-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of David Pearson
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 23:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: CEPT, and remote hams question

Hi:

The ARRL seems to feel  that in order to "control" an amateur station
governed by the CEPt agreement a ham must be physically present in the
CEPT's qth(country).If this interpretation is correct, this would severely
reduce the # of stations which may be operated by U.S hams via the
RCFORB(client) application.

Any other opinions on this?

Best regards,



David S. Pearson-wa4dsp 


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com