Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)



--
Extend ****s law - make 'em wear a cheat sheet 24/7

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?

The effects of an EMP have nothing to do with "sideband and sidetone",
the damaga is not limited to RF amps, and a lot of the damage will be
due to the amount of power that the internal circuitry will pick up.


Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

As there has been no nuclear wars, I would say the "nuclear deterrent"
has worked well.

What nation state would you target for a nuclear reprisal?

--
Jim Pennino

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.


--
Jim Pennino

wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:


Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

As there has been no nuclear wars, I would say the "nuclear deterrent"
has worked well.

What nation state would you target for a nuclear reprisal?

Let's start with Chippenham.

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur

"gareth" wrote in message
...
Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?
Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously
the attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well,
does it?

No doubt there are those who will misunderstand, perhaps for the purpose
of being obnoxiously argumentative, as does reay, the nub of my posts above,
which is, that
the threat to world peace does not come from nuclear bombs, but
figuratively, from an armada
of rowing boats crewed by those wearing the Osama Bin Liner and brandishing
sickles and scimitars.

With the outpouring of shock, hypocritically from Yankland, Britland and
France who supply the international
arms market which market supplied the AK47s and explosives, with "only" 250
people killed
or wounded, who, now, in their right mind, would set off a nuclear bomb
where the
damage to people would be many thousands of times worse?

So there is no purpose to the waste of money and resources inherent in
nuclear bombs

wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.


--
Roger Hayter

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.

So if the UK were nuked, there would be no retaliation until the US
allowed it?



--
Jim Pennino

"gareth" wrote in message ...

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

It is indeed a mess, and I'm doing my own part to be prepared.

However that includes some options not available to you. Example: a few
semiautomatic rifles, pistols and several thousand rounds.