RLW wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
From: on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm


wrote:
From: on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm
wrote:
From: on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm
wrote:
From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm
wrote:
From: on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm

Robesin is merely a product of the "incentive" licensing
system where all those who hunger for being a "somebody"
can get a Title - Rank - Privilege through a singular skill.

If it doesn't have rank or a uniform, Robesin isn't interested.

That certainly seems the case. The "uniform" is his
emperor's new clothes...

Lessee. He's got a Marine uniform (he says). A Tennessee State Guard
uniform (whatever that is), an ill-fitting Air Force CAP flight suit
uniform, and a male nurses uniform. And he has lots of military medals
that he never earned (according to him).

You know, whenever I saw folks in the CAP uniform at any Air Force
Base, including Maxwell, they work the 4b or Class A. Never ever saw a
CAP in a flight suit before robesin's well advertised home page.

In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP
personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen
several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing
flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian.

Saturdays. They bring the kids in for a tour and a meal at the chow
hall.

Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got
that 1,000 yard stare.

That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in
his bragging of what he did that never was... :-)

Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to
do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal
snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year
"career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years.

If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it
is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said.



Well, doggone it, Lennie. Next thing ya know he'll be posting over the
callsign of another Amateur.

Nope...ya just cain't believe guys like that, can you Len?

I don't believe his bs.

Al Klein wrote:
As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any
other language you don't know a single word of.

Sorry, you first challenged me to do that in Spanish.
I have proved beyond any doubt that I can do that.
Your need to suddenly change languages on me speaks
volumes.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

rom: on Thurs, Aug 24 2006 6:39 pm


wrote in message
oups.com...
From: on Wed, Aug 23 2006 7:46 pm
wrote:
From: on Tues, Aug 22 2006 7:14 pm
wrote:
From: on Mon, Aug 21 2006 6:30 pm
wrote:
From: an old friend on Mon, Aug 21 2006 3:16 pm
wrote:
From: on Sun, Aug 20 2006 2:57 pm


In all my visits to USAF bases I've never seen any CAP
personnel there, let alone some in a poopy suit. I've seen
several civilians on USAF bases, employed by the USAF, wearing
flight suits and clearly identified as to being civilian.

Saturdays. They bring the kids in for a tour and a meal at the chow
hall.

OK, that explains it. :-) If I was on-site for some company
business, I wouldn't be there on weekends. :-)

Oh, I don't know. After a hard day behind the microphone, he's got
that 1,000 yard stare.

That's also a symptom of anoxia...lack of oxygen used up in
his bragging of what he did that never was... :-)

Tsk, all that work he does in trying to bluff us. All he had to
do was present SOME sort of document proof or even a personal
snapshot taken while in that "hostile-action-filled" 18 year
"career" in the USMC. He hasn't done so after many years.

If he can't present a single item of 18 years of his life, it
is hard for the rest of us to believe anything he said.

I don't believe his bs.

Any rational, sane person can't believe his claims. Hopefully,
that is most of us reading some of the garbage going on in here
now.

I found it uproarious that Robeson tried to cover up his NOT
naming a single military radio that was operational during his
alleged 18-year "USMC career," claiming "all the information is
classified!" :-)

Absolute bull****. The names, ID, functions have all been in
public view...the 'Public' being the makers or those wanting to
get in on an RFQ (Request for Quote) being advertised by the
DoD. Even though I never operated (as a civilian) anything
more than an old ARC-27 or PRC-119 SINCGARS, all the military
radios operational between the times of those two are easily
recognizeable to me (well, the VRCs have lots of differences
between families but the same case and general form). The
operating manuals are NOT classified, just in limited
distribution. LOGSA the Logistics Supply Agency is busy making
CDs of all the printed manuals for darn near ALL military
equipment; it's a piece of cake to pop one of those CDs in an
ever-present military PC and read them. LOGSA has a website
and even civilians can download some of the older equipment's
manuals. LOGSA has some internal priority on what can be
downloaded (depending on the cookie generated by a non-military
PC). That was a tip I got from rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors
and rec.radio.amateur.homebrew. The nomenclatures and quick-
look facts are on a couple websites in a long, long, long list.
Even BAMA has some manuals for free download plus big link
lists for other sites that have them.

Robesin DID list some (questionable) nomenclatures for MARS
equipment once but NOTHING else. That kind of info can be
had from other hams' personal websites. MARS doesn't
normally talk about regular military tactical radio gear.
MARS doesn't normally use such. :-)

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:12:14 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any
other language you don't know a single word of.

Sorry, you first challenged me to do that in Spanish.

David's choice was Spanish. My choice was a language one couldn't
understand. Pay attention.

I have proved beyond any doubt that I can do that.
Your need to suddenly change languages on me speaks
volumes.

About your lack of content, yes.

Al Klein wrote:
David's choice was Spanish. My choice was a language one couldn't
understand. Pay attention.

Sorry Al, here's what you said:
Even if you didn't know "ola" from
"adios", you can copy Spanish in CW and hand it to the recipient, who
can read it. Try that with a mic.

Your words, not David's. You implied *Spanish* couldn't
be copied with a mic by a non-Spanish speaking person.
I showed that it can be done.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:12:14 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
As I said in another post, try that in Turkish. Or Latvian. Or any
other language you don't know a single word of.

Sorry, you first challenged me to do that in Spanish.

David's choice was Spanish. My choice was a language one couldn't
understand. Pay attention.

I have proved beyond any doubt that I can do that.
Your need to suddenly change languages on me speaks
volumes.

About your lack of content, yes.
nope your efforts to keep chaning to rules

it is tranperant as see though as your cowardly nature

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]


Now, today, we have such things a PSK31 to do much of the grunt work.
That will work as well as CW in most cases, I find.


Don't forget thought that solar flares and especially the aurora they
create induce a phase shift in signals and that wipes out PSK31.

True, I've never had much success during 2 metere aurora openings with
anything BUT CW. It ain't CW by the time it gets to the other end, but
it's still readable there.


--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:22:53 GMT, Dave Oldridge
wrote:

wrote in
m:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:10:08 GMT, Dave Oldridge
wrote:

"Woody" wrote in
news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08:

Well there ya have it folks.... 50wpm saves lives. So how does it
work? Turn up the speaker really loud and place it [face down] on
the person's chest, while
an op in South America tapped out universally accepted words that
would mimic an atrioventricular rhythm?

Did someone drop you on your head at birth?
wy wouldyou ask that did someone drop you on yours?

No, but when I'm confronted with TOTAL stupidity, it's a possible
explanotion for it.
where did you encounter total stpupidity? I missed it I saw someone
being sarcastic and reasonabley cleaver about it

I'm not responsible for your perceptual difficulties.



--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Al Klein wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:37 GMT, "Woody" wrote:

"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
. 159...
For CW to be effective, both operators
must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers
of language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case,
the fact that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once
enabled me to render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were
other more routine examples of where the language barrier was
crossed by CW--many messages I copied were not in English at all,
but were readable by their end recipients).

OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed
with bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish
test. Thanks a lot.

I think you missed the point. Even if you didn't know "ola" from
"adios", you can copy Spanish in CW and hand it to the recipient, who
can read it. Try that with a mic.

As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it
off to another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too.
No CW necessary.

Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well
enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not.
In CW, you can.

I can do it (and have done so) using phonetics. But that's SLOWER than
CW.


--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:22:21 GMT, Dave Oldridge
wrote:

Al Klein wrote in
:

Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well
enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not.
In CW, you can.

I can do it (and have done so) using phonetics. But that's SLOWER than
CW.

You're preaching to the choir, Dave. I've had to handle foreign
language traffic phonetically by voice and by CW - and I much prefer
CW for that kind of work, even though I prefer voice for most
rag-chewing. As you say, needing it spelled out is quite slow.