I wonder why Mr.Reay pours scorn on a proposal
which perhaps he himself ought to have come up
with bearing in mind his regular _BOASTING_ about how
important he perceives himself to be in the training
of newcomers?

Is it because he is tetchy (to use his own phrase) that he
didn't think of the idea first?

Perhaps, bearing in mind his recent boasts about share dealings,
he has shares in Waters And Stanton?

Either way, his rather silly and infantile sneering below does seem
to suggest that he is irrelevant to the future of _REAL_ Ham Radio;
and of no value to any scheme for beginners.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
"mexico_zero" wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message .....
is that we club together and conceive of a design snip
We wouldn't need any facilities other than were present in,
say, the KW2000 of 35 years ago snip
None of the CBer's facilities such as scanners, memories,
CAT interfaces, CTCSS and the like are necessary snip
I suggest that we consider a DSP approach for all the
baseband mod and demod, and then phasing techniques
for translating into the various bands.snip
Indeed, not a bad idea at all.
However, what is to be gained by re-inventing a (in radio terms) stone age
design?
Thinks like computer control provide added challenge and attraction to the
idea, why dismiss them? They could always be add-ons. DSP. Oh dear. I
assume this phasing technique relies on Big K.
Or maybe he just meant mixing, an existing technique not needing DSP.

"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...
I wonder why Mr.Reay pours scorn on a proposal
which perhaps he himself ought to have come up
with bearing in mind his regular _BOASTING_ about how
important he perceives himself to be in the training
of newcomers?


Actually, Dr Reay said it was a good idea. He did point out a few flaws in
your concept. As we have all done in the past.

You always react like this Gareth when one of your great ideas proves to be
less than great. At least this failure isn't going to cost you your job.