| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#151
November 5th 04, 12:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#153
November 5th 04, 12:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#154
November 5th 04, 02:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
PAMNO (N2EY) writes: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: In article , Mike Coslo writes: N2EY wrote: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: In article , Robert Casey writes: Well, except to some who wish to turn this newsgroup into a quasi-private Chat Room involving their own desires and preferences..and to have them damn all others for not thinking and feeling as they do. [yourself excluded] That's a pretty good summation of what *you* want from this newsgroup, Len. After all, you're the one telling other people to "shut the hell up".. I've thought that Lenover21 wanted to be the moderator in here. He claims otherwise. It's how he acts that makes the claims ring hollow. Perhaps it's time to repost the "feldwebel" classic... Saw him in a movie. Sittin atop an A-Bomb. Oooop! He jarred it loose. "Dr. Strangelove." :-) No, that's not how it happened in the movie. I wasn't talking about a "movie," Jimmie. Okay, big expert on the USAF and SAC, how do you get from the crew compartment of any B-52 into the bomb bay (and which one)? How does a 180 pound human jar loose a couple- ton Special Weapons (of thermonuclear yield)? And, speaking specifically about "radio," whatinhell is that "Gold Code Receiver" pictured that clicks up little characters in a supposed "digital display?" It was NEVER on any USAF radio inventory list, public or secure-sensitive. [there ARE "gold codes" but those are mathematical, and NOT specifically implemented or implementable as secure cryptographic means] Yeah, like a (mximum) 200 pound male can "jar loose" 4000 pounds of bomb (approximate weight of a special weapons of the time) from its shackles designed to take many g of force. :-) Tsk. These guys go to the movies and think that all the FICTION they see is the TRVTH and nothing but... :-) Ya never saw it, didja? Speak English, not baby talk, Jimmie. I've seen several models of the B-52, even been IN a couple of them. I've also been around Special Weapons, including the air-drop types. I'm also fairly familiar with the past USAF radio communications equipment, at least by sight. Knowing about "oil burner routes," and some performance envelopes of that Big Ugly Fat 'Fornicator' (BUFF) I also know that typical bomb-run airspeed is way too high to let anyone ride on a "shape" (Special Weapons old term) and play rodeo cowboy with their cowboy hat...airspeed is just too high. Does make for a nice anti-war motion picture full of way-overdone satire/sarcasm about the politics of the (then) Vietnam War plus left-overs of the old-time Cold War (then still hot) of the 50s. As a "professional" movie-maker and producer, you should KNOW all that. The relevant question is "Steel chassis or Aluminum chassis?" Depends on the application. What in the world are you gabbling about? "Greenlee punch or Nibbler?" Such relevant questions. From two nonbuilders... Kiss my yes, Jimmie boy. My hometown is where the Greenlee company IS and I've even been in that part of Greenlee and SEEN those punches being made...in 1949. [that part of Greenlee is just two large rooms of punch-making and grinding machinery, very very small compared to the Main Building they are located in] For that matter, I've also seen part of the GC Electronics operations when their wire-stripper line was still a part of it...and known two who worked there (in 1956). [GC is now a merge with Walsco and most of their 'products' are produced by others on an OEM basis] I have a small collection of Greenlee punches which have been gathering rust and dust. About every 5 years or so I may take them out, oil them and rub them with some steel wool. Haven't used them for about 9 years or so. Vacuum tube socket hole cutouts aren't a biggie among those NOT into boatanchors. [last time I used one was to put in a larger chassis-mount electrolytic on a repair and refurbish mini-project, took the 1 1/8" round punch] I suppose next you will demand I show up at Dayton with the "citations" to prove I do things? Harrrr!!!! Actually, it would be. Jimmie say he build with "recycled parts" and his "rig" didn't cost him more than $100. That's true. Of COURSE it's "true." Jimmie SAID so. The "word" of a radio god is solemn honesty, isn't it? Now anyone considering any sort of metal work for radios had better have $ome money since an average aluminum chassis from Bud Industries, LMB-Heeger, or Hammond Manufacturing (good folks in Canada) is going to cost about $30...and that isn't including a bottom cover plate. Metal cabinets are Out Of Sight. Check any catalog, paper or on-line, Allied, Newark, DigiKey, Mouser, even Ocean State Electronics. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Your imagination is limited to what you see in the catalogs of new parts. Not MY imagination, Jimmie. What do you do with those old chassis? Use all the old holes for the "new design?" Make everything "fit" those existing holes? bwahahahahahahahahaha! Some alloys of aluminum are sort of malleable. 2024 is somewhat that way but don't bend it too much. 6061 is NOT. One can't take a chunk of ordinary aluminum and hammer it flat to fill in the holes (using "recycled" i.e., previously-used), then bend/brake it back to some new shape. Why would anyone go through all that? Didn't you? Something about "beating swords into plowshares" but doing the analogue with all those old chassis? That means BUYING chassis somewhere...or snaffling ("swipe") them. You mean steal? I don't do that. Heavens, no! That would be a SIN and you'd still be mumbling Hail Marys... Do you have a guilty conscience, Len? No. I DO have a conscience. Right now its wondering why I'm wasting all this time writing a reply to an unrepentant PCTA-er who is bound and determined to rationalize (one way or the other) that he is perfect ham in every way. At early 1990 prices, that average chassis alluded to before would cost about $25. So, for six chassis in the photograph that would be a total of about $150. Except they weren't bought new out of catalogs. Which drastically reduces the price paid. Prove that. Show your work. The excuse to be given will be that he "bought it at a flea market" or some hamvention for "a very low price." :-) How is that an "excuse", Len? It's the truth, in some cases. In others, chassis, panels and other parts were recycled from other sources. Riiiighhhht. For example, the transmitter section is built in the case from a BC-191/375 tuning unit, with a new panel made from a piece of sheet aluminum. Total cost about $2. Riiiiighhhht. :-) Whatever the story is, it will have the usual embellishments, the brags of greatness, the usual suspects. :-) You mean like the guy who claimed to have handled X million messages per month 24/7 at a military radio station, but didn't bother to mention the 700+ other personnel there at the time? U.S. Army radio station ADA sent 220 thousand TTY messages a month in 1955 in 24/7 operations, radio circuits all over the Pacific on HF. Pacific edition of the Stars & Stripes military newspaper had that item in it ('Stripes' was and is still available to the military public and to dependents). Each and every team supervisor at transmitters was immediately responsible to keep those radio transmitters operating when scheduled. No brag at all. Just a description of duties. I did that as one of the team supervisors. A long time ago. Many others of E-5 and up also did that on other shifts [we were on a 12-day cycle, 3 on each shift and 3 days off as the 4th part of that]. The Photographic Company was not involved in radio communications yet was a part of the 8235th Army Unit then known as the FEC Sig Svc Bn (that's "Far East Command Signal Service Battalion" to you civilians). They worked in downtown Tokyo then in their own large still-and-motion-picture lab...that rivaled that of the LIFE magazine photo lab in NYC. Headquarters Company had the Outside Plant Telephone crews...the ones who put up all the 30 to 70 foot poles that held wire lines and the antennas for both receiving and trans- mitting sites. 'Outside Plant' did not send or receive anything but were needed. Control and Teletype Relay at Chuo Kogyo (outside, near Camp Drake) were another group that did, respectively, the radio and wireline circuit control and the torn-tape teletype relay operations (latter from about 200+ chadless-punch printed tape machines). I'm not counting those specifically doing microwave radio relay ops & maintenance (which I also did) or the "Carrier Equipment" necessary to multiplex several circuits on the same voice channel (wire or radio). "Carrier" operations would later morph into handling the terminal equipment for the DSN-DCS which is now the mainstay for military communications worldwide (primary, there are other routes by other means as secondary). The old "carrier" duties now occupy most of the 78th Bn still at Camp Zama, Japan. Jimmie, I can get even MORE specific about all of that old stuff because: (1). I was there; (2). I have documents to prove it; (3). I have personal photographs as well as Signal Corps photos (with mimeoed ID on the backs, as military standard then) from those days; (4). I have other documents obtained as gifts from a now-retired civilian engineer who was there at the time and stayed with the station complex after the USAF took over in 1963 (he now lives in California); (5). I have been in correspondence, both written and telephone, with another who was there at the same time as I, has been a amateur radio licensee for years; (6). The Pacific Stars & Stripes did check out some of my material and published it (article by staffer Rick Chernitzer who did the interview) on 10 November 2002 (it's in the middle of that Sunday edition, a "double truck" or two-page spread as the publishing folks sometimes call it). No, I don't have a TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment) which every battalion and up has. A TO&E would itemize all the equipment and who is where in the organization. I don't see much need to get one. I've been in correspondence with 5 others who were there, in that battalion, at the same time I was. We might put one together from memory, but WHY do you need to account for all (approximately) 700? Or the guy who claims to have operated from T5 but cannot recall what bands, modes, radios, or antennas were used? You will have to take that up with "him." Of course, you WILL "correct" him when "he makes errors" because YOU have done all that military and commercial civilian radio communications and "know what it is like," don't you? Of course you do...you READ about it in your various Janes books. You KNOW what it is like to be within flying distance of nastyfolks who Have The Bomb and want to "correct" others about NATO aircraft code names. I'm wondering what YOU do "to serve your country" which is as good of better than actually serving with the military? Come on, TELL US. Show us your heroism and wonderful deeds that makes YOU so superior you can denigrate those of us who DID serve in the military. |
|
#155
November 5th 04, 02:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: It is a sad state of affairs the the organization that specifies a Morse Code Exam cannot define Morse Code. Usurpers of regulatory authority took it upon themselves up the reduced 5 WPM rate to a healthy 13-15 WPM rate in defiance of Part 97. Well, in all honesty, the FCC does have a definition of it, but not an exact one. They still reference an out-of-date (and no longer existing) CCITT document and do not specifically state a word rate. Considering all the technical things the FCC does, definitely, define and describe, it is a wonder that they are so lax on International Morse Code. We've both seen the numerous rationalizations of the "Farnsworth" spacing but nobody, and I mean NOBODY, has seen that specifically stated in any official version of Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. (which is published every two years in October by the Government Printing Office and made available for free at the GPO website). What we got is an "interpretation" by the FCC that Farnsworth spacing "is okay for VECs to use in testing." Not in any Part 97 and never even left the Commission (except to the supreme court of the league). Not to worry. With the re-election of the Administration there will be "four more years" of the same "attention" to amateur radio affairs as has been for the last 3 1/2 years, the same Commissioner in Chief, and full speed (with lots of champagne) to BPL. Lots of "incentive" to attract more newcomers into hamme raddio. All that and those warm-hearted ghouls of the PCTA dissing and cussing all those not wanting to emulate or recreate olde-tyme radio. Tsk. All those "professionals" in law-making and fund-raising and membership-organization-running... :-) |
|
#156
November 5th 04, 02:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS.... From: (William) Date: 10/31/2004 7:53 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: Dave Heil wrote in message ... Len Over 21 wrote: There's no reasoning with emotional belief systems...such as the PCTA's insistence that all who come after must jump through the same hoops they had to when younger. You have a point. There is no reasoning with emotional belief systems. Take a guy who believes that those tested in amateur radio are "jumping through hoops" or that the testing elements given today are the same as those in years past. How would you deal with such a guy? True enough. The Volunteer Examiners are giving Farnsworth exams rather than the FCC/Part 97 specified Morse Code exams. There is no such thing as a "Farnsworth exam". Volunteer examiners will tell you otherwise. "Steve" says he's a VE and he's OK. :-) And supposedly being a VE, you should know that. Whatever "Steve" does is OK. Under "Steve Rulez." The FCC is required to ensure that all exams and exam materials used in the conduct of exams on their behalf are appropriate. The FCC is required to ensure that what they enforce on Howard Stern is also enforced on Oprah. According to "Steve," the FCC pays a lot of attention to what a bunch of radio hobbyists do in the service of their country... In reality there is a difference story...but the fantasylanders don't want to tarnish the patina of their embellishments. I said before the restructuring and I'll say it again, "What I fear most about restructuring is a lack of enforcement, and what I fear most about maintaining the status quo is a lack of enforcement." Amateur Radio is now in it's 30th year of a lack of enforcement. Actually, longer. CB (on HF) became legal 46 years ago...NO code test then to get on HF, not even a single test to take. After a few years the "licensure" (token callsign on completion of application) was removed. To the best of my knowledge, Well there you go. You're basing your opinion upon your own limited knowledge. True enough. But, "Steve" has LICENSURE and is "fully authorized" to operate (radiating RF) within the boundaries of amateur radio regulations. That's enough to make him imagine anything that he wants is real, legal, and the Absolute Truth. [I still say it is all due to some post-traumatic stress problem, perhaps from those "seven hostile actions"] not a single exam in service today has been identified by the FCC as being inappropriate or not in confomance with FCC requirements, nor has the FCC ever directed the removal from service of any Morse Code exam as unacceptable. Nor would they. It is Morse Code that is specified in Part 97. You're going to have to try a little harder to unseat my informed opinion. The FCC still hasn't fully qualified its own definition of International Morse Code in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. Neither do they fully and unambiguously define telegraphy "word rate." However, "Steve" imagines he is still Boss NCO of the unit and gives Orders as if everyone else were the recruits in the "corps." As if... Steve, K4YZ Yeh, sure. Whatever. Opus' Mayor Bill (the Cat) has the last word..."Pbthththth..." :-) Steve has an incredibly uninformed knowledge bank wrt Volunteer Examining. Luckily for the ARS, he is busy being a volunteer for numerous other organizations. His "bank" has no interest. Come to think of it, I'm not much "interested" in that "knowledge." :-) Careful, "Steve" is going to "show you his 'citations' at Dayton!" [I think his singular citation is swingting...as the saying goes] I'm still curious as to "Steve's" citations for those 'seven hostile actions' he claimed he had. Or the acknowledgement that DoD really does run MARS and does so OUTSIDE the ham bands. Or "Steve's" power (as a licensured health professional) to pick up a phone and have just anyone "picked up" by the authorities. That's just up in the top 3 of dozens of his claims. Ho hum. |
|
#157
November 5th 04, 02:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... Or the guy who claims to have operated from T5 but cannot recall what bands, modes, radios, or antennas were used? He recalls, but the green envy and the accusations ****ed him off. But...but...but...Jimmie's "been there, done all that" and "knows exactly what it is like!" Hi hi. He owes N2EY no explanation, and N2EY will receive none. Right on! He hopes N2EY will understand. Hah! Fat chance! Jimmie thinks he is the "perfect ham" and can do NO wrong, always "corrects" others who "make all those mistakes." That's been the recurring underlayer in his postings here. PCTAs never apologize...except in a blue moon (when their hair mysteriously grows out...) |
|
#158
November 5th 04, 06:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: (William) Date: 11/4/2004 5:39 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message ... Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS.... From: (William) Date: 11/3/2004 1:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... I am a VE and I've never administered a "Farnsworth" examination. They do not exist. Here's a hint: it's the default exam. The examinee must ask for the real Morse Exam if they want to comply with Part 97. There is no such thing as a Farnsworth exam. Denial. Fact. Show me a reference. And Amateur Radio haas not had a lack of enforcement...they've had a lack of ADEQUATE enforcement. Hmmmm? I wonder what I meant by "lack?" Your original statement was worded in such a way as to insinuate that there'd been NO enforcement. That was not tue. MORE enforcement was what was needed then...And still true today. Agreed. You're still on the loose. Hardly. Ovr 30 years of Amateur licensure nothing but commendations and awards...The only "correspondence" I've ever receive from the FCC has been IRT my renewals. To the best of my knowledge, Well there you go. You're basing your opinion upon your own limited knowledge. I dare say MY "limits" are far more expansive than yours. As a matter of fact, I KNOW they are! They may be. But if you didn't pay attention during your exposure, then your knowledge and opinions will be found lacking. So far, nothing you've been able to "bring up" has exceeded my skills, knowledge or experience, Brain. Apparently it has, on numerous occasions. Such as...??? You mean that assinine assertion "Unlicensed devices play a major role in emergency comms" you've made? Sheeesh. What "informed opinion"...??? You are talking about a "Farnsworth" exam which does not exist. Then why would the ARRL and then the NCVEC make an announcement that henceforth all of their default code exams would be Farnsworth? That you could still take the real Morse exam if you knew to ask for it? That's pretty STUPID, Brain, but then that's nothing new from you. There's very little of ANYthing you've engaged in this forum that indicates that you are "informed" at all... That shows just how uninformed you are. Not as of this moment. You still are an idiot and you are still making unfounded and irrational assertions. Steve, K4YZ Denial. You may deny all you care to. Brian P. Burke remains a liar and an idiot. No Brag...Just Fact... Steve, K4YZ |
|
#159
November 5th 04, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#160
November 5th 04, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: PAMNO (N2EY) Date: 11/5/2004 6:02 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: I also know that typical bomb-run airspeed is way too high to let anyone ride on a "shape" (Special Weapons old term) and play rodeo cowboy with their cowboy hat...airspeed is just too high. Tell it to Kubrick. That's what I love about Sir Scumbag of Lanark...Always making snide insinuations about how no one else but he seems to have a sense of humor...Then clearly demonstrates he ahs neither humor OR imagination. Steve, K4YZ |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS.... | General | |||
Linear Mode
