come to pass.

Absolutely. But...that will be the END of the ARS
(Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society).



retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person


Correction - I'm "not" Caveat Lector........ I use small case cl, he
uses
capitals. See my address within!

cl

Sorry, Mr. Lowercase. Apologies redered. Correction
so noted.

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
cl wrote:

The local ham club is looking for people to take classes with "Now
Your Talking" rather than try to find people with any electronics
background. I offered to help maintain their club equipment but they
brushed me off because I don't have a ham ticket. I still have a
half
way decent RF bench, but nothing compared to the $1,000,000 plus
benches
of test equipment I had at Microdyne.

That's all well and good Mike and no doubt you're a quite competent RF
tech, not even a discussion. But I think you're missing some critical
points here. Rumors to the contrary ham radio is overwhelmingly a
communications hobby, it is NOT an electronics hobby as such. Sure
there are any number of high-end electronics gurus who also have ham
tickets and exercise their skills on the bands, in the clubs and even
in this funny-farm of a USENET group. But they're not the heart & soul
of ham radio today for certain and I'm not particularly convinced they
ever were. In general the average ham learns as much about electronics
as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on
average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment.
Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is.

In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane
details of electronics amongst the average members of the average
neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer
to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios,
they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios
off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking"
fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham
radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and
prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a
bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in
an offer to "help".

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

w3rv

From: Michael A. Terrell on Apr 18, 8:00 pm

wrote:


when I had the full copy." I was awarded 26T20 as a civilian acquired

skill that was a three year school at Ft. Monmoth. I worked in CATV,
CARS, installed a nice PA system for the General's conference room at
Ft
Rucker, and did a little RADAR before I was sent to Alaska to the
AFRTS
radio & TV station to work as one of the engineers. I made E4 in 18
months and received a letter of commendation from the commanding
general
of the three Army bases in Alaska.

Great! But Fort Monmouth changed considerably from
when I was there in '52 to when you were there 20
years later. :-)

A prime example was that there was NO CATV or any
TV courses available nor the curricula for same.
I'm not even sure where the AFRS (later AFRTS) guys
went to get electronics training for their broadcast
stations. AFRS was quite separate from regular Army
communications.

Also, in an odd quirk at the time, ALL rank promotions
were frozen while IN any school. Once one got out
(no "graduation ceremonies"), they started counting
time-in-grade. :-)


Just before I got out of the Army the FCC stopped allowing veterans

to convert the 26T20 rating to a First phone without taking the test
again. I was bored with broadcast anyway so I did commercial sound
and
industrial electronics. Later I did early personal computer and
monitor
repair.

Sigh. I didn't know the Army had gotten so generous
with conversions of skills to civilian licenses. :-)

I lucked out on assignments after Signal School, even
though it was overseas. Couldn't have asked for a
better assignment except maybe in Europe as part of
ACAN.


We had basic models that were customized to the customer's needs.
I
also did a lot of preliminary testing of new components, boards, and
modules before they were released to production so I had a lot of data

books and marked drawings on my bench. ISO 9001, as they set it up
did
not let the techs keep any notes or write anything on any drawing for
future reference. I was no longer allowed to maintain test software I

wrote for an automated test fixture and I didn't want a pencil pushing

outsider in my way while I was working. I had a 350 MHz four channel
scope on my bench, but if a test procedure specified a 20 Mhz scope
the
idiots insisted that you couldn't use the 20 Mhz filter in a better
scope. Even worse, they sent someone new for every audit so we had to

go through the same mess each time. One would insist a process was
wrong. We would change it to suit him or her. The next one wanted it

changed back.

Heh heh heh...sounds all too familiar. While we may not
have been in the same place, we got T-shirts in the
same style! :-)


BTW I worked on almost every board or module for a special
broadband
telemetry receiver we built for the International Space Station.
These
days I work on old ham receivers and test equipment when I feel well
enough to spend a couple hours at the bench.

Outstanding that you are still active! My old office
cubicle buddy from RCA days (only a month younger than
myself) suffers from Parkinson's disease (kept down
from deleterious effects, thank God), yet he had
enough soup left that he fixed me up with an HP 608 and
HP 606 generator when I got married (again). He's
on 20 meters every Saturday after fixing up his old
tube clunker transceiver.

I'm still bopping around with only minor problems, none
worth mentioning. But, I come from a family of long
livers (oh...about three feet or so, some would say).
:-)

wrote:

That's all well and good Mike and no doubt you're a quite competent RF
tech, not even a discussion. But I think you're missing some critical
points here. Rumors to the contrary ham radio is overwhelmingly a
communications hobby, it is NOT an electronics hobby as such. Sure
there are any number of high-end electronics gurus who also have ham
tickets and exercise their skills on the bands, in the clubs and even
in this funny-farm of a USENET group. But they're not the heart & soul
of ham radio today for certain and I'm not particularly convinced they
ever were.


Most of the hams I knew as a kid were home brewers. They were not
designers but they could build a piece of equipment form a magazine
article or the handbook. I lived about an hour from Mendelson's in
dayton Ohio, and I ran into a lot of hams there, digging through the
unmarked bins of parts to build their latest project or repair one of
their projects.


In general the average ham learns as much about electronics
as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on
average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment.
Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is.


The whole idea of a rig that isn't intended to be serviced is what
kills my interest in the hobby. Too many custom parts made of
"Unobtaium" and refusing to release schematics and manuals really don't
inspire any confidence in imported whiz bang rigs. Not that I prefer
tube only rigs, but they were built to do their job for years. Maybe
the rest of the ham's life if he took decent care of his equipment. A
lot of newer rigs end up as parts units because some cheap component is
NLA. Do you think many of these all plastic LCD display radios will
still work when they are 20 years old?


I was told that a couple retired EEs in the local club did all their
repairs and I didn't know enough to be of any help. Then they told me
to "stuff" my offer of free electronic components to help them with
repairs.


In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane
details of electronics amongst the average members of the average
neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer
to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios,
they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios
off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking"
fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham
radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and
prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a
bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in
an offer to "help".

w3rv

Sorry, but that analogy just doesn't work. Several members told me
they wanted to do minor repairs on their equipment but they didn't have
access to the tools or equipment anymore. I offered them free use of my
shop and to give them most of the components from my old repair business
if I had what they needed and was laughed at. As far as weapons, I have
used a bow but I prefer an M-72. ;-)



A lot of hams in Ohio were glad that I was willing to help out
including an old ham in his late 70s that brought me a home brew
receiver that a SK friend of his had built 20 years before. He had lost
the hand drawn schematics and had a tear rolling down his cheek as he
asked if there was any way I could possibly help him. He told me that
he had been to every two way shop and ham equipment dealer to try to
find someone to work on it and that one of them told him I was the only
one in the county crazy enough to even attempt a repair. I tore it down
and found a couple burnt resistors and shorted caps. I did a little
math, dug around and found the parts. He was crying when the receiver
came to life and kept thanking me. I charged him $10 and he hurried
home to get back on the air. Helping someone like that is better than
spending hours on the air to me. Different strokes?

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

wrote:

Great! But Fort Monmouth changed considerably from
when I was there in '52 to when you were there 20
years later. :-)


I was born in '52. :-)


I was never at Ft Monmoth. I was tested at Ft Knox, Ky. I caught a
lot of hell for it from other soldiers at my different duty stations
because they didn't believe anyone could test out of a three year
school. The station manager in Alaska told me "No civilian knows a damn
thing about electronics". In fact, someone on another newsgroup was
mailing me and calling me a liar because he insists that no one ever
tested out of a tech school. I am requesting my full military records
package from the archives to shut him up.


A prime example was that there was NO CATV or any
TV courses available nor the curricula for same.
I'm not even sure where the AFRS (later AFRTS) guys
went to get electronics training for their broadcast
stations. AFRS was quite separate from regular Army
communications.


The radio station at Ft Greely, Ak was built in 1948 as the first
permanent "Armed Forces Radio Network" station. It was the first site
built with commercial broadcast equipment instead of modified military
gear used at some sites during WW II. The radio transmitter was a gates
BC250 In the early '70s AFRTS claimed to be the only all tube network
in the world.

I wish I had a photo copy of the FCC license for the two stations.

The radio station: frequency 980 KHz.
Power: 250 watts, or as deemed necessary.
Expiration date: Until no longer needed.

The TV station: Frequency Channel 8.
Power: 500 watts, or as deemed necessary.
Expiration date: Until no longer needed.


Sigh. I didn't know the Army had gotten so generous
with conversions of skills to civilian licenses. :-)


Actually, it was the FCC who no longer accepted the military records
in lieu of testing.

There were a few other skills that were convertible. I know guys that
worked high pressure steam who said they just walked into the state's
licensing office with their military records, paid the fee and left with
their state license. There were a couple EEs who worked at the Ft
Greely power plant. That was where I first got my hands on the IEEE
magazine. Of course, air traffic controllers were in demand in civilian
airports. Ft Tucker trained helicopter pilots and Air traffic
controllers at Carin Air field, a few miles from the Daleville gate.
The airfield was Air Force, but the students were Army and Air Force, as
well as some foreign militaries. My main job was to maintain two 12
channel CATV systems and 350 monitors used to distribute educational TV
and weather data to student pilots.


I lucked out on assignments after Signal School, even
though it was overseas. Couldn't have asked for a
better assignment except maybe in Europe as part of
ACAN.

We had basic models that were customized to the customer's needs.
I
also did a lot of preliminary testing of new components, boards, and
modules before they were released to production so I had a lot of data

books and marked drawings on my bench. ISO 9001, as they set it up
did
not let the techs keep any notes or write anything on any drawing for
future reference. I was no longer allowed to maintain test software I

wrote for an automated test fixture and I didn't want a pencil pushing

outsider in my way while I was working. I had a 350 MHz four channel
scope on my bench, but if a test procedure specified a 20 Mhz scope
the
idiots insisted that you couldn't use the 20 Mhz filter in a better
scope. Even worse, they sent someone new for every audit so we had to

go through the same mess each time. One would insist a process was
wrong. We would change it to suit him or her. The next one wanted it

changed back.

Heh heh heh...sounds all too familiar. While we may not
have been in the same place, we got T-shirts in the
same style! :-)

BTW I worked on almost every board or module for a special
broadband
telemetry receiver we built for the International Space Station.
These
days I work on old ham receivers and test equipment when I feel well
enough to spend a couple hours at the bench.

Outstanding that you are still active! My old office
cubicle buddy from RCA days (only a month younger than
myself) suffers from Parkinson's disease (kept down
from deleterious effects, thank God), yet he had
enough soup left that he fixed me up with an HP 608 and
HP 606 generator when I got married (again). He's
on 20 meters every Saturday after fixing up his old
tube clunker transceiver.


http://home.earthlink.net/~mike.terrell/Projects.html has some of my
test equipment listed. Its on the "Current Projects" page because I
went two years that I couldn't do anything so I am in the process of
checking out all my equipment before I start using it again.



I'm still bopping around with only minor problems, none
worth mentioning. But, I come from a family of long
livers (oh...about three feet or so, some would say).
:-)




My retired dad lives next door. Other than some problems with his
hip he's in better shape than I am. I'm 100% disabled due to a laundry
list of "Little" problems. I still try to keep busy with some
projects. I am trying to set up a program to collect old and dead
computers, refurbish them and give them to disabled vets in my area.
This part of Florida is full of retired and disabled vets trying to
survive on a small pension or Social Security.

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Bert Craig wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Serious HF dxers aren't serious unless they work both phone and CW,
ya
have to do both or else yer shooting yerself in the foot.

Thanks Brian. I'm havin' gobs of fun and have broken out the K2/100
running
approx. 70 Watts. I'm about a third of the way through toward DXCC

Whoa, boy you're moving fast, good show! How much sleep are you getting
these days?

and need
an Asian contact for WAC.

Condx from here on the east coast to the north Pacific rim have been
somewhere between lousy and hideous for weeks. A JA or a UA0 will pop
into your sights eventually.

I will heed your advice re. using both phone and CW.

If the name of your game is building your mixed-mode total, which is
usually the Holy Grail, you really don't have any choice. It's simple
statistics and the immutable math of the decibles. CW gets you an
automatic 10 dB advantage over ssb but if the rarie only runs ssb well
then the ten dB obviously don't mean squat, etc.

I haven't done any "card counting" for years but I suspect that if I
did I'd find that 25-30% of my total are phone contacts. Despite the
fact that I'm a terrible weak-signal phone op and spend 95% of my time
lurking in the lower 25s.

I do hop on 10 using
phone while commuting to and from work, but in the shack, well... ;-)

Heh. Keeping an eye on 10 from the vehicle is not a bad idea actually.
If ten opens up you know the lower bands are probably cooking.

To be honest, I suppose I just find the CW itself fun. I'm also a big
WW II
buff and was quite honored to work W5E over the weekend, who was
operating
from a Boeing B-17 bomber. The op was using the vintage onboard gear.
It's
humbling to think of the transmissions that have traveled through
that gear.

Hap and his Eighth; "Yankee Doodle went to . . BERLIN?!" Yee-haw! Only
those who were there will ever really know what it was like.

Tnx agn es hpe c u ota. Take care es...

Later. Dit-dit.

--
Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI
FISTS #9384/CC #1736
QRP ARCI #11782

w3rv

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
cl wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

cl wrote:



which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a
few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test.

Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get
to 5 wpm.

I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some
understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people.

I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a lot
of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Ok.... It took "me" 2 weeks, I know others who learned it quickly, but I
can't provide a time frame. Yes, code "can" be harder for others to pick
up. I don't doubt that for a minute. Point is, you have to put one foot
in front of the other and stick with it, to get down the path to learn
it.

Yup. I must confess that I kind of drew you and some folks into this a
bit, because I have some significant hearing defects. Several 60+ db
notches,esp at the mid and higher frequencies and two separate tones of
tinnitis, a different frequency for each ear. I haven't had a quiet moment
for 30 years or more. When conversing with people, I read lips. I
understand vey much the situation of the fellow whose wife has notches in
her hearing.(conjecture alert) I would also say I suspect that the
constant noise in my ears has turned of parts of my brain that process
sound. And that is probably why I had such a hard time (conjecture alert
off) All I can say for teh folks with hearing problems is that study,
practice, and most importantly, relaxation during copying is the key.


I can only imagine what it must be like with a significant hearing deficit.
I can not and will not put anyone down who has such a problem. As to how
they can learn code, there are many ways, but I guess it comes down to
whatever works best for that person. Not everyone's condition is the same.
I've tested folks with some difficulties, I followed the guidelines as given
by the VEC/FCC. There are ways to test folks with such problems, but getting
them to be able to learn the code - is the first hurdle.

Does 6 months of constant hard effort indicate the desire to "stick with
it"?


Yes, I'd say it certainly does! You are to be commended for doing such.
You're not a "quitter". And from the sounds of things, you didn't "whine"
about it either.

Many don't want to start, and whine about it without ever putting forth
effort. Hell, I know people who bitched about having to look at the
"basic" Q/A manual! One remark was "Do I "have" to learn all this?"
Another - "Do I "have" to read all these questions?" But yet they want a
license. Pure laziness. Licenses should be "earned" not given away.
People are least likely to respect something "given" to them.

Most of what you say , I agree with. If a person doesn't want to study,
they shouldn't have a license

The bands are already showing signs of deterioration from people who just
don't care.

I've heard of some pretty wild times long before things were "dumbed
down"!

- Mike KB3EIA -




Yeah, I know the bands started going to hell before that. Used to be I
bragged about Ham to people who wanted their kids to get into radio but
didn't want the CB garbage. I said Ham is clean. Today, you couldn't pay me
to advertise ham as being clean. It is NOT. That is sad..... It really is.
The exams test for proficiency in code, theory, rules and regulations.
They're not psychological tests to weed out all the riff raff. IF such tests
existed for Ham and all the other fields, maybe we'd have a better world.
There are people in every field, be it a hobby or profession - who ruin it
or at the very least - make it look bad for the rest.

cl

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
cl wrote:


which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a
few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test.

Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get
to 5 wpm.

I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some
understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people.

I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a lot
of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid.

- Mike KB3EIA -

I agree with you Mike. I hate it when I hear someone say "it only took me
a few days" as that raises unrealistic expectations on the part of the
students. It becomes very hard to convince them that they will probably
need more time than that and to keep them motivated to keep working on it.
The average person needs 30 hours of study (1/2 per EVERY day for 60 days)
to get there. Some will take longer such as yourself but at least once
they have put in the 30 hours, they will be able to tell that they are
making progress even if it takes longer for them.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


NOT EVERYONE - can learn code in a few days or whatever. There are some
things I can't learn in a month where others picked it up right away.
Different strokes for different folks. Each person has to take whatever time
as needed to learn whatever it is they're needing/desiring to learn. Some
fields don't allow a lot of time to learn, while others - such as ham - do.
There is nothing saying that ANYONE has to learn code overnight or they're a
failure. Just because I was fortunate enough to get enough in - in that 2
weeks - to pass the exam, doesn't make me a "CW" king. I use code "rarely".
But, I had a chance once to teach some youngsters the code. One picked it up
pretty quick, the others - were a bit slower. If anyone wants/needs to learn
the code to get a license, they will - in whatever time it takes - IF they
start on it and don't give up.
The last part is the key...... To get started and stick with it. As to time,
when they get all the characters down, then they'll have learned the code.
Be it 2 weeks or 2 years.

cl

"cl" wrote in message
o.verio.net...
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
cl wrote:


which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a
few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test.

Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get
to 5 wpm.

I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some
understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people.

I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a lot
of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid.

- Mike KB3EIA -

I agree with you Mike. I hate it when I hear someone say "it only took
me a few days" as that raises unrealistic expectations on the part of the
students. It becomes very hard to convince them that they will probably
need more time than that and to keep them motivated to keep working on
it. The average person needs 30 hours of study (1/2 per EVERY day for 60
days) to get there. Some will take longer such as yourself but at least
once they have put in the 30 hours, they will be able to tell that they
are making progress even if it takes longer for them.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


NOT EVERYONE - can learn code in a few days or whatever. There are some
things I can't learn in a month where others picked it up right away.
Different strokes for different folks. Each person has to take whatever
time as needed to learn whatever it is they're needing/desiring to learn.
Some fields don't allow a lot of time to learn, while others - such as
ham - do.
There is nothing saying that ANYONE has to learn code overnight or they're
a failure. Just because I was fortunate enough to get enough in - in that
2 weeks - to pass the exam, doesn't make me a "CW" king. I use code
"rarely". But, I had a chance once to teach some youngsters the code. One
picked it up pretty quick, the others - were a bit slower. If anyone
wants/needs to learn the code to get a license, they will - in whatever
time it takes - IF they start on it and don't give up.
The last part is the key...... To get started and stick with it. As to
time, when they get all the characters down, then they'll have learned the
code. Be it 2 weeks or 2 years.

cl


Maybe someone would care to explain to me and to the rest of the world, how
Gordon West's mini camps held on a "weekend" - were designed to work to get
people ready to pass an exam by the end of the weekend. At least that is the
understanding "I" got from reading the ads. I can't recall if some of those
weekends were just for NO Code Tech OR if perhaps they also may have been
for "code" as well. IF SO, and someone never had code, then how the hell did
they do it in 3 days? Two weeks is a reasonable amount of time - as it took
me. Three days? I don't know...... Is it possible? Even if it were just for
the theory, most I know, can't learn all that in 3 days. You'd have live,
eat, sleep, breathe and take the books to the can with you. IF anyone took
one of those weekends, speak up. IF maybe "I" misunderstood the ad wordage,
someone - anyone - feel free to correct me.

cl

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:41:32 GMT, robert casey wrote:

And that was in the summer! I had to do a code sending
test at 5wpm at the old FCC field office in New York City
(I've heard the place is now condos).

When the rats started to outnumber the people in that building,
something had to be done....

A shame - 641 Washington Street was a beautiful example of 1920s
Federal office buildings. A family friend who was my inspiration in
joining the Federal workforce worked there most of her career as a
secretary and then a claims examiner for the pre-OSHA Labor
Department - may she rest in peace.

I was in the FCC facilities there only six times - twice for amateur
exams, three times for commercial exams, and once to the office
(which was at the opposite end of the building from the exam rooms)
to pick up travel orders to my first duty post in San Francisco.

I still can't comprehend those old buildings as upscale condos....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane