"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...


Yep...In "MILITARY" communications...Not specifically United
States "MILITARY"...

The document you cited, for the enlightenment of others reading,
is a multi-nation Allied document...

Nice bit of Andersonian-like misdirection to try to cover your ignorance
(lie?), but welcome to another lesson in US Military Communications, a subject
in which you tried to lecture Len, and now me.

ALL similar publications used by our AMERICAN military communicators are also
used by our military allies. That's why they're call "ACP-xxx". ("ACP" is the
acronym for "Allied Communications Publication")

ACP-113 (Call Sign Book for Ships), ACP-117 (Routing Indicators), ACP-120
(Security), ACP-121 (General Communications Instructions) ACP-124 (CW
Procedures), ACP-125 (Voice Procedures), and many other ACP's are the standard
documents used by United States Military communicators. (The publications cited
are all unclassified, and probably on the web at the JCS site which contains the
ACP-131 which you examined.)

Z-codes are more prevelent in AMERICAN military communicaitons.

Another "error" (lie?). Q-codes are at least as prevelant in AMERICAN military
communications, if not more-so, than "Z" signals. Been there, done that, got
the medals.

For someone who professes to have been seriously involved in one
strictly-AMERICAN military communcations system, NAVMARCORPSMARS, governed by
the publication "NTP-8" ("NTP" being the acronym for Naval Telecommunications
Publication), your ignorance (lie?) is especially odd, since NTP-8 reproduces an
extensive list of "Q" signals taken directly from ACP-131. I would think you'd
have known that you never saw a copy of NTP-8.

Oh, never mind. I forgot that NAVMARCORPSMARS is NOT a military
communications system. "Sorry Hans, MARS IS "Amateur Radio"

But thanks for pointing out s three year old lie, Hans.

You're welcome, Steve.

This lecture brought to you free by K0HB, who hopes that you are not offended by
anything you read, inferred, assumed, presumed or otherwise guessed I might have
possibly meant as demeaning - unless of course you are a pompous
"full-of-yourself" individual who WANTS to be insulted. In which case be my
guest.


ZBM2,

de Hans, K0HB