RadioBanter - View Single Post - What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?

Dave Heil · November 2nd 06, 06:27 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
wrote:

Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo?

Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-)

Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective
attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that
have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT.

"Minutiae", Len.

Do the terms "Mother Superior" or "Waffen SS Guy" hold any meaning for
you? Do you believe them to be attempts at personal humiliation?

Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and
misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS
epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own
typographical errors...forever and ever... :-)

Oh, I'll make an occasional typo, Len. When you misuse the same term
repeatedly, that isn't a typo. You do that often. Now if I were to
make frequent *factual errors*, we'd be in the same boat.

Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that
sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no
interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career.
You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force
didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air
Force service.

That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered
as direct combat military branches by draftees worried
silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the
Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is.

I wasn't a draftee, Len. Nobody in the Air Force was a draftee. Nobody
in the Navy was a draftee. I enlisted for four years. The minimum Navy
hitch was for three. Draftees were non-volunteers who served two years.
Now what?

Some are
lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of
those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some
expertise or interest.
Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular
combat zones.

Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur
radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining
communications 24/7.

Oddly enough, I was not in the "amateur radio contesting" AFSC, yet my
contesting skills were exactly the same skills I used in my Air Force
duties.

Military personnel placement types
MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some
communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they
have for a communications specialty.

Oh, they MIGHT, huh? I suppose those bypassed specialist exam scores
had nothing whatever to do with it.

When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps
and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur
and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code
aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-)

That's you.

Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on,
but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had
definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor
personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My
only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-)

....but you went through schooling. I was actually working within two
days of my arrival at my first assignment. That was about
seven-and-a-half weeks after I first entered the Air Force.

What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his
personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to
the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war
hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-)

Altered version, Leonard? What has been altered? Couple that with what
military personnel folks MIGHT do and you may have stumbled upon
something big. Have a talk with your new pal at your local recruiting
office or better yet, have Brian Burke contact those "Stolen Valor" folks.

No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some
of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing)
from their original form. The official archives in
St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has
them for proof by anyone with access.

Have you found people who are interested in seeing your proof, Len? I'm
not offering you any proof. I have no intention of providing you
digitized anything. Now what?

Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment
after basic training?
They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force
technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven
years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of
basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of
leave after Amarillo.
Lackland. San Antonio.
Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo.
That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo.
I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base.

Did you catch what Robesin's got?
I have no idea of what you mean, Brian.
Stories about the military.

Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-)

Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds
of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as
a civilian.

That's great, Len. I'm sure that has provided you countless hours of
pleasant memories.

I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T"
receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or
Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG).

See, Leonard, you don't know everything after all. You're about to hose
it up in your typical fashion though. I never said that I never
received any specialty training after basic training. I wrote that I
never attended any military technical school.

The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms
alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of
the Army in the later 1940s).

That's all irrelevant, Len. Rest easy, old soldier. The Air Force's
long tradition was maintained.

"Getting the message through"
at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA
and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a
HOBBY.

I'm certain that you'll be upset to learn that the message didn't always
get through at any time of the day or night, watchword or no.

There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special
Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale)
folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television)
Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even
"fight" for ratings. It is show biz.

That's very interesting, Len. I had nothing to do with AFRS or AFRTS.

MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS.

No, Len, it isn't. MARS never was show biz. I never had a MARS
assignment. I've advised you of that a number of times.

It was
never essential to military communications despite the
civilian hoopla attached to it. From the 1990s onward,
MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US
government...and doing good at that...using military MARS
personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys
overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use
phone patches to talk direct to family and friends.

That's quite interesting, Len.

But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what
Heil actually did.

No, you don't actually know what I did.

He hasn't described it in anything but
vague generalities and intimations of work performed.

No, I haven't described it in detail.

To
use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one
hostile action" action. :-)

That'd be one more hostile action than you've experienced in the
military, Len. :-) :-) :-)

Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts."

I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with few facts.

Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to
his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than
the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio.

My personal history runs 57 years, Leonard. That you know little of it
is of little importance to me.

[he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ]

Is this where you "resort to misdirective attempts at personal
humiliation about minutae [sic] that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT"?

Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave
up on code.
Oracle uses a lot of code.

Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred
to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE."

Huh? So what Brian really meant is COMPUTER code and that's what you
mean too?

Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code."

Did Brian write "code" or not?

I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and
use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't
"morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of
a million "words per second." [based on the average number
of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman
that can come close to that. :-)

Great, Len. Stick with it. Enjoy your niche. :-) :-)

My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that
1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit
words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50
KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the
3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV
box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in
plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an
incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts
DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box]

Fascinating, but totally irrelevant, Len.

But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse
expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they
typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use.
Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief...

"We must all" accept? Just how are you involved in amateur radio, Len?
You needn't accept anything. Just stay on the sidelines and snipe as
you've done for the past decade.

1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui.

I didn't think you were *that* old, Leonard.