Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:
(N2EY) wrote in message
Wrong. Incorrect. Not true at all in the real world of HF radio.
Len has just demonstrated, once more, that he just doesn't get it.
You expected anything else??
"Real world of HF radio?" The one that goes from 3 MHz to 30 MHz?
Amateur activity is concerned only with a fraction of that.
That's right. That portion of the radio spectrum used by radio
amateurs.
That's the portion of the spectrum of concern to those in this
newsgroup.
Amateur licenses aren't legal for out-of-amateur band transmission
even if one has a four-on-the-floor extra license.
Right again. We all knew that. It hasn't bothered us in the least.
Has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which is HF amateur radio.
Spank.
Kellie has a spanking fetish?
The SUBJECT AT HAND is "US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
Look at the subject line in the message header.
Try to get your subject threads in a row, ducks.
Wouldn't you just love to know the last date on which you commented on
the topic in that header? Shall I google it up for you?
As far as on-off keyed radiotelegraphy, your mention of "phase noise"
as being "crud" in synthesizer frequency control is akin to making
a big case for gold-plated music system speaker wires. :-)
Wrong again, Len.
What a goofball . . .
Where was all the noise about phase noise BEFORE the
cellular equipment expansion? There were oscillators around
then, even PLL frequency control systems.
You didn't read about it; therefore, it could not have taken place.
Izzat about it?
Phase noise was NOT an important buzzword then. Now it is,
coincidental with the cell phone equipment and component
makers using it in their advertisements.
Your facts are wrong.
Conclusion: Too many hams get their "technical expertise"
by memorizing advertisement copy instead of theory texts.
And if your facts are wrong, you end up with a wrong conclusion.
How many points did Len get with it in the last CQWW? Or even the last SS
or Field Day?
Or in RRAP.
Tsk. Jimmie and Kellie avoid answering or discussing. Misdirection
is all they can do...but that is traditional in Usenet since before it was
split from the ARPANET. Saw it then, still see it now...all the
self-professed "experts" making like renowned gurus, dissing and
cussing anyone who disagrees with their immortal words.
I dunno, Len...That sounds an awfully lot like you.
However, I HAVE had experience in civilian and military radio
communications, radionavigation equipment (TACAN, DME, VOR,
Localizer, Glideslope), IFF transponders, radars (search, weather,
target acquisition and tracking), earlier air-to-air missle systems
(principally the first Hughes Aircraft GARs 1 through 4), and the
strange McDonnel decoy drone that could imitate formations of
B-52s to Russky radar...using a TWT as a broadband mixer
covering many octaves.
You just had to get him started again, eh Brian?
Sweetums is a
perfect example of these windbags.
"Windbags?" :-)
That pretty well sums it up.
Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as
one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in
"Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate
legally. An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer
disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question.
No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd
think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response
would be wrong.
Dave K8MN