RadioBanter - 05-235 - Any new procode test arguments?

From: on Dec 10, 3:48 pm, [the MAN who knows all about
military life!]

wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

Well now, I just don't think ANY multiple classes
should exist. ONE license. How about that?

It's not as good as if there are multiple license classes.

"Not as good" for whom? :-)

For those who MUST be "better than others" at something?

Not really. The license classes exist for two reasons:

1) To offer an easy way to get started in amateur radio

One can't go into an HRO, plunk down plastic, walk out
with a working two-way radio? :-)

Can't be *used* (legally) for amateur radio without the appropriate
license.

Now, now, "legality" was not part of the boundary conditions!

"Legality" does NOT enter the picture if you are talking
about LEGAL LICENSES. If one has a legal license then
they ARE legal. Try to stay focussed.

2) To offer an easier path to full privileges than would
exist with a single license class that required the same
knowledge

Removing the artificiality of all that class distinction
with carrot-stick "privileges" would erase all of that.

Instead, new hams would just have to pass all the exams
at once just to get started. Unless you want to lower the
*written* test requirements even more.

What are you talking about? With ONE license (NO "classes")
there would be only ONE written exam, wouldn't there?

Face it, Jimmie, all those classes GREW in order to
satisfy some POLITICAL reasons within the amateur
community.

Such as? Back up your claim - if you can.

Tsk, your little political heart have a malfunction?
[need a "valve" replacement?]

The "back-up" is the NON-ARRL history of amateur radio
regulations, indeed ALL the radio regulations since
1912. POLITICS, little Jimmie. It's been pervasive
in the very being of the league since 1914. A "one-
party" system more or less in between the World Wars
and on to the immediate post-WW2 era. By the 1970s
other groups were being heard from and the league's
virtual oligarchy was beginning to dwindle. Just the
beginning of their influence, but it IS dwindling to
the REAL law-makers.

In the beginning there was only ONE license.

The time of one-amateur-radio-license-class ended
more than 70 years ago, Len.

U.S. amateur radio licensing began in 1912 92 years
ago. [historical fact]

The FCC has been in existance for 71 years. [law of
the land as of the Communications Act of 1934]

Yes. Amateur radio licenses are earned by passing the
required tests.

Strange, the FCC says it GRANTS them.

How much did you earn on your test? Was it fixed-fee
or at an hourly rate? Did you get cash or was it by
check? Did you have to file any W-2s on that earning?

Sure. But you haven't earned any amateur radio license, Len....

I haven't gotten any money for it, true. :-)

Neither do I (or did) live in Louisiana like Broose. :-)

As far as the federal government is concerned, it is a NON-PAYING
radio activity that is expressly forbidden to broadcast or engage
in common-carrier communications.

That's true.

Whoa...if you agree to what I said, how can you say you
"earned" your license?

How did stamp collecting help with hurricane relief?

Amateur radio provided shelter, food, clothing for hurricane
victims? Geez, here I thought all they were doing was
relaying health and welfare messages...some of the time.

How many hurricane victims are you providing food and
shelter for, Jimmie?

Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY.

But that's not all it is, Len. Grow up and accept that shouting the
same old tired lines doesn't convince anyone.

Hello? See the word "basically" in my quoted sentence?

Come on, give us the old trite cliche phrases used by the
league for years...

Individuals engaged in that HOBBY are licensed because the FCC,
the federal agency regulating all civil radio, think that
licensing is a tool of regulation.

That's partly true.

Entirely true. FCC is NOT an academic organization, "grading"
amateurs on their radio skills.

Licenses are also required because the USA has
entered into treaty agreements with other countries regarding radio
regulation - including amateur radio regulation.

Tsk, tsk, what is that but REGULATION? :-)

In almost every human activity there are levels of
achievement and recognition for same.

"Recognition?" Tsk, now you are back to CLASS DISTINCTION
again!

Is achievement a bad thing?

Tsk, "achievement" can be shown many, many ways. You could
have little merit badges, for example. Those would look good
on your amateur radio service uniforms.

Both Office Depot and Office Max stores offer packets of
gold stars, have both paperware and software products for
certificates (suitable for framing).

The complexity of the task of operating a radio
transmitter is directly related to the transmitter. Some are
designed to be very easy to operate, others are more
complex.

Whoooo...took a lot of brainpower to generate THAT phrase
didn't it? :-)

You're taking the experience of a few people and a few transmitters
and demanding that it apply to everyone and all transmitters. That's
just nonsense.

Tsk, I thought it was an example. An example that I lived
through. An example that you did NOT live through.

Ah, THAT's the difference! You didn't do it, were unacquainted
with it, ergo it "did not apply!" :-)

How many 15 KW HF transmitters have you personally QSYed, Jimmie?

How many 10 KW HF transmitters? 5 KW? 1 KW?

Besides, you've already contradicted yourself. The "very ordinary young men"
all had some form of technical training, and had been selected for the task.

"Selected for the task:" Personnel requirements were for N number
of warm bodies within X number of MOS ranges. :-)

Tsk. Jimmie, you just don't understand how the military works.

If you were a "warm body" in the area and came even close to the
requirements of filling a TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment)
then you "got selected."

The transmitters they adjusted were already set up, operating, and the
procedures to use them completely worked out. Those "very ordinary young men"
all had more-experienced supervision to teach them the tasks and make
sure they did it right.

Did you expect that everyone had to build everything themselves?!?

Do you expect sailors to all get sheet steel and torches and
build the ship they are going to serve on?

Do you expect airmen to all get aluminum and engines and build
the aircraft they are going to serve on?

Do you expect choo-choo drivers to build their locomotives
themselves? :-)

And yet it took *days* of on-the-job instruction before they could be left to
do the job on their own!

Yes, ONE TO THREE DAYS, the latter for the slow-learners and goof-
offs. :-)

Even then, the more-experienced supervision was
always on-call if a problem arose.

That's usually the situation with EVERY military or civilian
organization. :-)

After some experience, the formerly-inexperienced BECAME the
"experienced supervision" people.

Len, you don't seem to be able to understand the concept of "amateur
radio station", let alone "operating".

Jimmie, YOU don't understand that every other radio service
does NOT define either "station" or "operating" by amateur
radio "rules." :-)

Not even MARS! :-)

UNLICENSED people by the thousands every day in the
USA are OPERATING TRANSCEIVERS.

Not operating in the amateur radio sense.

Oh, you want PLMRS mobiles to send QSLs on "contacts?"

Do you want "radiosport contests" among aviation radio or
maritime radio services?

Do you think policemen carrying neat little two-way radios
subscribe to QST? :-)

"Morse code operation in amateur radio" does NOT
involve ALL "skilled operators."

Yes, it does. Those operators have skills that you do not
have, and I think that bothers the heck out of you.

No bother at all to me, Jimmie. I just disregarded any
NEED to learn morse code since I was never, ever
required to use it in the military or in the much longer
civilian life career I still have.

It seems to really bother you that I'm better than you
at Morse Code.

Har! No. Whatever skills you have at morsemanship
are overwhelmed by your posturing arrogance of
superiority at that singular skill. :-)

So? It's a test of Morse Code skill at a very basic level. Entry-
level, nothing more. It nevertheless requires that the operator
have the skills.

That's the current law, Jimmie. It's just a political thing.
Since no higher deity commanded that morse code testing be
done for amateur radio licenses, ordinary humans must have
done it. Whatever humans have done, humans can UNDO.

VECs can delete sending tests at their option.

Not delete - waive.

Correction noted and accepted.

I see you've waived bye-bye there...would have made it much
easier on the readers. :-)

The radios they USE are either owned by their employers
(businesses, public safety agences as examples) or
themselves (private boat or aircraft owners as an
example). Some of those radios DO require a licensed
person to oversee their operation and technical details,
but some do NOT. Depends on the particular radio service.

In amateur radio, a licensed amateur radio operator is required.

You have a macro for that sentence? :-)

Yes, Jimmie, I'm well aware of Title 47 C.F.R.'s Part 97.

That's what I've been telling you all along.

Well, there you go again with the posturing arrogance...

Do you also tell your grandmother how to suck eggs? :-)

Amateur USE is the same whether home-built or ready-built.

That's nonsense.

Oh? :-) In what way is it "Different?" Where it say dat
in Part 97?

"Adjustment" to meet the technical requirements
of Part 97 is NOT USE.

It's operating, Len.

Tsk, tsk, ADJUSTMENT can be done by anyone in a non-radiating
test. Takes NO "license" to perform a test-alignment-calibration
such as done by factory folks on ham equipment.

Radar isn't for communications. And the SGC2020 is dirt simple
compared to most amateur radio HF transceivers - even the Southgate
series are much more complex to operate.

Oh, dear, here it comes with posturing arrogance again...

The SGC 2020 full manual is available on the SGC website.
I don't see any "Southgate" company in any search result.
Maybe you can provide a link to a "Southgate" radio so that
all can compare the two?

In general aviation
craft, the civil communications band transceiver IS
simple. It should be since a pilot has to give their
attention to FLYING, not playing ham. Add to that the
civil navigation band receiver with OBS for VOR, the
crossed needles for LOC and GS, the Marker Beacon
lights, is NOT "simple."

Sure it is.

You have actually DONE all of that in a cockpit while aloft?

How about in a cockpit on the ground? Or in a lab/workshop
on the ground?

Tell all what "OBS" means...or "LOC" or "GS" means. Tell us
all how to acknowledge tower communications by voice, receive
and read back flight plans, communicate with radar-guided air
traffic control.

Tell us what "squawk" means in pilot parlance.

I've done all that...even after I gave up student flying.

The regulations were changed so that radios which did not require
technical adjustment would be used, and so the need for radio
licenses could be included in the pilot's license.

What?!? NO need for morsemanship to be a pilot?!? :-)

Good heavens, shouldn't you be writing to the head of the
FAA?

On top of all that, the radio users cited above may not be
FCC licensed, but they are trained, tested and often certified in
proper radio procedures for the radios they use.

"Certified?" They get neat little certificates (suitable
for framing)? Wow!

Yes - did you ever see an FAA pilot's license?

No, couldn't afford to continue. I did pass the written
test and have the confirmation document digitized. Need
to see it? :-)

No "moonies" in that. However, I once considered buying a
Mooney single-engine, was wisely talked out of it to invest
in a residence (the present southern house).

For
example, licenses to pilot aircraft with radios require that
the licensee know and demonstrate proper aircraft radio
procedures. The pilot's license cannot be obtained without
such radio procedure knowledge.

By the Federal AVIATION Administration, NOT the FCC.

The FCC doesn't license radio amateurs.

It doesn't?!? Oh, my, you ARE INCORRECT!!! :-)

Hey, Brian, note that Jimmie wrote, in exact words,
"The FCC doesn't license radio amateurs."

That's a keeper. Mount it on a plaque, hang it on the wall,
have a little spotlight on it!

Pilots don't go
chasing DX or engaging in contact contests or sending QSLs.
Ignore a ham transceiver and all you do is miss a contact
or two, maybe offend the person at the other end. Ignore
an airplane's attitude or instruments and it crashes and
the pilot is DEAD, perhaps with many more on the ground.

Those instruments aren't radios, Len.

Amateur radios don't go crashing through fences and killing
kids in vehicles.

[Southwest Airlines is improving their service. They didn't
kill anyone going through the fence a Bob Hope Airport, but
they did at Chicago's Midway]

Yeah, they pay by plastic, perhaps follow the maker's
instructions and fumble around until things sound right.

Is there something wrong with using a credit/debit card?

Or following manufacturer's instructions?

Besides - it's something *you* haven't done.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...something I HAVE done, sweetums. Years ago
a bunch of us got together to give a friend his retirement
and birthday gift, an HF transceiver. I had the "plastic"
higher level and paid for it, another with a station wagon
transported the boxes, yet another provided the Bird
Wattmeter and dummy load and we all went through the
instruction manual to make sure it worked. NON-radiating
test, Jimmie. Perfectly legal.

There are more than a few of us radio amateurs who design
and build our own amateur stations. You haven't done any
of that, Len, yet you pass judgement on us as if you are
somehow superior.

Oh, my, I couldn't possibly be more superior than your
own posturing arrogance...and being a "manufacturer" of
transceivers! [still haven't gotten beyond the uncased
prototype?]

"Modern" amateur band transceivers, transmitters, receivers, etc.
are ready-to-play right out of the box. Those are aligned,
tested, calibrated, ready-to-go. Sort of like the SGC 2020
private marine version SSB transceiver. :-)

The modern amateur radio transceivers I use didn't come that way.

Yes, yes, Jimmie, whatever YOU use applies to all other
700+ thousand U.S. amateur radio licensees. :-)

None of the others USE anything but what you've USED?

Six months of microwave school, a transmitter that was all set up
and ready to go, an experienced instructor, and it still took you
an *hour* of instruction?

Yes. :-)

Not having the SUPERIOR morsemanship skills nor the extensive
amateur radio exprience (that automatically makes it possible
to operate all transmitters everywhere of any make), we were
all relegated to mere mortal human learning processes. :-)

By the way, part of that Signal Schooling was radar fundamentals.
That was because of the close similarity of radar electronics
to the electronics used in radio relay equipments coming after
WW2. Absolutely NONE of it prepared us for operating ANY of the
HF transmitters (36 of them at first) at station ADA in 1953.
NONE of it prepared anyone for teletypewriter operation, for
operation of the VHF and UHF radio relay equipment, for operation
of the "carrier" bays. NONE of it involved learning of the
General Electric commercial microwave radio relay equipment that
ADA would use for primary communication link of transmitters to
the rest of the station...we got a two-week "course" by two GE
tech-reps to "prepare" us for that in late 1954.

Some might say your behavior was closer to "monkey-see, monkey-do"...

Careful, Jimmie, you are going ape-**** in your nastiness.

Been eating bananas again?

Oh, I get it, you did the OOK, OOK thing!

Did you finally find the "gorilla of your dreams?" :-)

Reductio ad absurdum is a valid way of determining the
validity of a logical process.

Tsk, you've reduced yourself to ridiculous there...

It means that the intent of the original license was that the licensees
would operate to check out and develop new technologies and
methods, rather than ragchewing, DX chasing, contesting, etc.

...and you've done that, right? :-)

Describe for us your EME station. Describe for us your fine
developmental work in new solid-state amateur radio designs
(other than building an Elecraft kit).

And just what is
YOUR experience at ham bands of 220 MHz and up?

More than yours, Len!

I've only listened to the predecessor of the Condor Net in
Newbury Park, CA, demonstrated by one of the ham-licensed
employees there. At Teledyne Electronics, my employer
during the late 70s. It was the first state-long network
to use all tone switching for routing without using any
microprocessor control.

Especially right after WW2.

More than yours, Len!

Tsk, you didn't exist until some time AFTER WW2, Jimmie.

Who is sneering? Not me. The Technician failed in its original purpose.
That's a fact.

That's only an OPINION, Jimmie. Tsk, better learn some acting
skills, redirect that sneer. You can do it with practice.

Right now the combined numbers of no-code-Technician and Technician
Plus classes make up a bit more that 48% of ALL U.S. amateur radio
licenses granted. Almost HALF, Jimmie.

48.1% - 318,462 out of 661,800 as of December 9.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. That doesn't agree with www.hamdata.com figures.

Oh, yes, you are quoting NON-grace-period figures derived
from elsewhere as "official." Heavens, I have to keep
taking THAT into account, don't I? :-)

But that percentage is *down* from what it was 5 years ago, right after
the rules changes.

Well now, www.hamdata.com figures also show the totals of
EXPIRATIONS versus NEW (never before licensed) licensees.
Expirations still exceed the NEW licensees and have for the
last year.

And for more than 5-1/2 years, the only choice new hams have had for
their first license class is the Technician, General, or Extra.

Duuhhhhh...stating the obvious again, aren't you?

Oh, my, you DO have to try NOT to talk down to everyone. It
help you lose your posturing arrogance of superiority...

...because it has NO code test.

How do you know that is the reason, Len?

I asked around. :-)

If, on a sampling basis, ten out of ten answer "it was the lack
of a code test," then I'd assume it was because of that.

Of course, as a dyed-in-the-woolies morseman, you are not
expected to accept that. TS.

So you let a *name* - a single *word* - stop you from getting
an Amateur Radio license.

A long time ago another called me a "sunnuvabitch." I put
him down with a bleeding nose and lip.

Certain words DO have an effect on people, Jimmie.

A word of advice: Avoid street fighting...you ain't good at it.

You're not even a beginner in amateur radio, Len. You haven't
even begun there....

Oh, my, that old thing again. Jimmie, TRY to learn to
write "licensed" before "amateur radio," then you will
be correct in your beloved nastygram.

I was an amateur radio hobbyist beginning in 1947, including
modifying some WW2 surplus ARC-5 receivers and transmitters
for AC power operation as well as BC radios. I didn't
bother with getting a LICENSE then, Jimmie. I didn't bother
with getting ANY federal radio operator license until 1956
and that one was a Commercial one. First class, one sitting.

I'd like to see you try to throw rotten tomatoes at me in real
life, Len. You're really brave in the cyber-world, a continent
away.

Tsk, tsk, Jimmie, getting worried? :-)

Fear not. You aren't worth getting involved in with force of
any kind. However, I am what I am in-person or on-computer.
You don't like that? TS.

You mean like somebody who thinks the zoning ideas of
1960 should still apply 30-40-45 years later?

In most cases, absolutely YES. :-)

Does local residence zoning affect radio of any kind? I
think not.

Residences are for LIVING in, Jimmie. It is HOME.

on entering military service

No. The ONLY aptitude test given in regards to radio was
a morse code cognition test given to all recruits.

Ah - and you didn't make the grade on that one, eh?
Explains a lot.

I'm glad I didn't make a good aptitude there. Would have wound
up in Field Radio and had to go through the remainder out in
the boonies somewhere. :-)

So you all had various electrical/electronic training from
the US Army. None of you were 100% self-taught in the
area of radio/electricity/electronics.

You have some kind of point to make but all you are doing
is carving a sharp stake our of balsa wood. It isn't to
the point. :-)

We had a separate group for outside-plant telephone
people...the "pole cats" who put up the poles for wire
antennas and strung the wire.

So you didn't have to do that sort of thing. Ever climbed
a wooden pole with hooks and belt, Len?

Those "hooks" were called "spikes" or "boot spikes." The
belt wasn't supposed to be used until reaching wherever
height one was supposed to be working at.

Yes, I did do that a couple times. Wasn't my job but
thought it fun to do once or twice. :-)

Tsk. Try NOT to TELL ME what I or any contemporaries were
doing, Jimmie. You don't know dink about it.

IOW, I have stated exactly how it was.

HAAARRR!!!! You still don't know dink about it. You weren't there.

You and the others had
significant "radio-electronics" background before you got
to Japan, and did not have to start from scratch.

We had adequate sanitary facilities. No scratching.

The supply clerk had flea powder to issue if needed. :-)

But all had various training *in the army* before they ever got to
Japan. Some went to microwave school, some went to Field Radio
School, some went to tele-typewriter school, a few went to
inside-plant telephone school.

Inside-plant WHAT, Jimmie? There were variations in that. :-)

Exactly! Amateur radio is totally different.

I should certainly hope so! The military is all about war-
fighting and defense of the country. Amateur radio is
basically a HOBBY. There IS a difference! :-)

They didn't hold any hands or coddle lower ranks if that's
what you mean...guffaw!

Not at all. I mean that you were not on your own.

Not quite. :-) In soldier training which we did on a
constant basis off-signal-duty, we would often be very
much alone. Usually as recon observers. Sometimes we
would be the walkie-talkie carriers on patrol exercises.
(AN/PRC-9s for us at the time, -8 or -10 for others)

In the presence of lethal AC primary power it was customary
to have at least two on duty at a particular place for
safety reasons.

Yet there were always experienced people around if really
needed. You were part of a team, not all on your own.

Jimmie boy, the military is all about TEAMWORK.

But when you started, you didn't have to work anything out
on your own.

Right...my high school neglected to teach me how to KILL
the enemy.

IOW, you had everything you needed. That's a good thing!

Usually. Spare parts were scarce only a very few times.

We had "three hots and a cot." :-)

We had deprivations but you won't understand them. :-)

What, to QSY a BC-339? A BC-340? An LD-T2? Simple task.
The PW-15 was a bit more difficult due to the large double-
shorting links for the final tank (15 KW conservative RF
output, looked like it was built for three times that).
Piece of cake to anyone with a normal memory.

Or a notebook. And after being shown how to do it several
times.

"Notebook?!?" Geez, fella, where did you think all this
took place, some ivy-league school?!?

As a matter of fact, notebooks and diaries were discouraged
at the time and generally confiscated if found. True. There
were applicable ARs and SRs on the subject forbidding such
things on one's person or in possessions. That was to foil
enemy M.I. efforts in case of capture or being overrun.

Jimmie, I WAS THERE, YOU WERE NOT.

And yet I have a very good understanding of what went on.

Sigh...no you don't Jimmie. Tsk, it's useless to explain
military service to you...you think it is nice and sanitary
and like the movies and TV...

When it comes to operating an amateur radio station as
a teenager, *I* was there, Len, and *you* were not.

Yes, yes, you were the teen-age hero of radio. Did you
engage in "seven hostile actions" too? :-)

What "incentives" did we have? Name them.

Promotion - more pay - more interesting work - better
duty....

"Better duty?" Same basic job at same place, more
responsibility, more attention to running tasks rather
than doing them. We had "permanent passes" off-post
at all ranks.

"Interesting work?" I thought it was "interesting" from
day one. :-)

"More pay?" Yes, in a way. As a Sergeant E-5, with
overseas bonus, my monthly pay got as high as $156!!! :-)

[big Ben Stein "wowwwww" there... :-) ]

Also the negative incentives - somebody who didn't
do the job right could wind up in the infantry...

I don't know of any case where that happened. I'm sure
you do because you "know exactly how it was." :-)

Do the job poorly and your duty switched without being
reassigned. Do the job really badly and you could wind
up in a court-martial.

Er, we didn't practice "decimation" a la the old Roman
Legions. :-)

Guess what? Civilians have a similar situation - except
civilians can usually quit at any time.

Guess what, sweetums, I've been a civilian since 1956.

Try as I might, I can't see any civilian occupation where
anyone "closes with, and destroys, the enemy." Not even
the police departments get that drastic. Destructive
environmental testing and building demolition isn't about
"destroying the enemy."

Describe YOUR "EME" station, Jimmie.

I don't have one, Len. Neither do you. But I know what it
would take to build and operate one as a radio amateur.

Wow! Really something! I've got a couple documents on
building a JPL Deep Space Network earth station. Explains
a lot of it in those. Mars and the Jovians are a bit farther
out than the Earth's moon.

A "Goldstone" antenna isn't allowed in my residential zoned
neighborhood and I don't have a few million bucks to spend
on one. Maybe I'm supposed to wait for a big Lotto winning?

My whole point is that amateur radio is a completely different
environment, and your military radio experiences don't
necessarily prove anything about amateur radio.

Jimmie, "your whole point" is spent in a fruitless exercise
to get me to cease and desist posting in here...because my
opinions are contrary to yours on your radio hobby.

HF radio is HF radio. It doesn't matter what label you attach
to it...military, civilian, commercial, amateur...the physics
of it are the SAME regardless. Regulatory statements about
USE are (and have almost always been) POLITICAL insofar as
allocations of use and "classes" of operator licenses...in any
civilian radio service in the USA.

Now you consider yourself superior to almost everyone!

No. I don't consider myself "superior" to anyone. If you
get that perception, TS, I'm outspoken and don't use
gratuitous phrases of praises in newsgroups.

Certainly to anyone who disagrees with you.

Poor baby...afraid of losing your assumed ranking as one of
the pontifical arrogant old-line parrots of league phrasing?
[Dave Heil tops you in that category]

All the military radios I've seen that are/were
meant to be used by "line outfits" were made as simple to operate
as possible. That paradigm goes all the way back to the WW2
BC-611 "walkie talkie".

"Handie-talkie," Jimmie. The "walkie-talkie" was the SCR-300
(R/T being BC-1000). Both designed by MOTOROLA.
Tell us YOUR experiences WITH "line" outfits.

I've worked in a line gang. Have you? I think not!

I could care less if you have worked in a chain gang.

Be civil and acknowledge that YOU MADE A MISTAKE.

It's like the same mistake you made earlier saying that
"the FCC doesn't license radio amateurs." :-)

Most
radio amateurs are essentially self-taught, in their spare
time, using their own resources. What they could learn
in a week or two of intense formal training might take a
month to a year of part-time self-study.

WTF is this "intense" formal training?

The microwave school you went to, Len. How many hours
a day/week? For how many months? All paid for by the
taxpayers, right?

The taxpayers would be out the SAME amount of money if I
hadn't gone to this "intense" school of 8 hours a day,
5 days a week...:-)

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Intense?" Hardly. I've worked far longer hours for the
SAME pay as a civilian.

No, we didn't sleep intense. We had wooden barracks buildings
left over from WW2, then quonset hut barracks also left over
from WW2. :-) Fort Monmouth's "permanent" billets were still
in construction in 1952.

It's not my problem if you picked your employers poorly, Len.
Good employers see the value in training their people.

I picked "wrong employers?!?" HAAARRRR!

Hughes Aircraft Company, Thompson Ramo-Wooldridge, Teledyne
Electronics, RCA Corporation, Rockwell International. My
major employers. Little bitty shack-type employers, yah? :-)

And the compensation you did get was continued employment.
That's the way it works!

No ****? Wow! Revelations! BWAAAAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

Jimmie, a salary is what one gets as "compensation for work
performed." A paycheck is, in reality, a legal document
attesting to that.

Do you get "compensation" for your amateur radio "service?"

Try working 35-38 hours a week, taking 5 engineering
courses (one of them at the graduate level) per term,
and getting everywhere without a car (home, job and
work were all separated by several miles).

Oh! Travail and suffering you must have gone through!

You got me beat. I worked 40 to 48 hours a week but
never took more than 3 courses at night per semester.
[there's such a thing as trying to keep a social life
at least puttering along on standby for one day off a
week instead of ossifying to some kind of reclusive
social dummy...:-)]

Well, I did have a CAR! Wow, how fortunate of me, a
veritable "luxury" in the Los Angeles area where things
tend to be separated by MANY miles. :-)

Wanna see a picture of my 1953 rebuilt Austin-Healey
two-door sports car? Had that for much of my 15
calendar years of college-level schooling. I have it
digitized, can send it e-mail. :-)

Then there was grad school, after I'd been out of college
for a decade. Full time plus work, school at night, etc.
At least I had a car....

Ooooo, ooooo! Spare me the soap opera stuff. Your buddy
(Dudly the Imposter) will call you some kind of remedial
English or immigrant "night school" person! :-)

--

Now about your one-class-of-license idea:

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

Tsk, tsk, you've been busy, busy, busy trying to tear me down
and NOW you want a "discussion?!?" BWAAAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

Jimmie boy, since you "know all about military life," I'll
just comment in typical words OF the military in their
finest tradition -

"Go shove it up your ass, Jimmie Noserve!"