Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)



--
Extend ****s law - make 'em wear a cheat sheet 24/7

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.


--
Jim Pennino

wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.


--
Roger Hayter

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.

So if the UK were nuked, there would be no retaliation until the US
allowed it?



--
Jim Pennino

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Brian Reay wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
wrote:

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Rambo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 19:10:50 +0000, Fred Roberts wrote:

On 17/11/2015 18:30, gareth wrote:

Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that
an EMP will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of
power that their antennae will pick up?

Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and
previously the attack on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly
and unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully
well, does it?

Well we haven't been nuked yet ;-)

Well the Soviet Nuclear weapon defence threat kept the Americans under
control for decades.

As well as the Brits.

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.



So which bits did the Americans control, exactly? After all, if you know
so much, you could tell us. Otherwise it is just bovine muck.

The US has no control over UK nuclear forces.

UK nuclear forces are nominally under NATO control but the UK has the
last word.


--
Jim Pennino

On 18/11/2015 01:19, Brian Reay wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:

The UK nuclear weapons are firmly under the control of the Americans
anyway, so I don't think we have them for other than ceremonial and
solidarity reasons. They're not cheap either.

So which bits did the Americans control, exactly? After all, if you know
so much, you could tell us. Otherwise it is just bovine muck.

Well, seeing as how you are an expert in the analysis of newspaper
stories, you might recall in the aftermath of the Falklands war it was
mentioned, probably in one of the Sunday heavies, that at one of the
early crisis meetings to discuss the UK's options the nuking of the city
of Cordoba was mentioned. ISTR it being said that the idea was dropped
when it was allegedly discovered that the US wouldn't give us the
targeting codes.

Next time you're in the British Library looking for local newspaper
reports of dogs, you might care to spend some time looking for something
a little more serious. It might help you to stop looking like a
small-minded fool.


--
Spike

"Crime butchers innocence to secure a throne, and innocence struggles
with all its might against the attempts of crime"

- Maximilien Robespierre

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
Those who were self-taught to the exclusion of sideband and sidetone
are no doubt unaware that in the event of a nuclear detonation that an EMP
will melt the RF amps in their RXs because of the amount of power that
their antennae will pick up?

The effects of an EMP have nothing to do with "sideband and sidetone",
the damaga is not limited to RF amps, and a lot of the damage will be
due to the amount of power that the internal circuitry will pick up.


Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

As there has been no nuclear wars, I would say the "nuclear deterrent"
has worked well.

What nation state would you target for a nuclear reprisal?

--
Jim Pennino

wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:


Anyway, in the light of the events in Paris last Friday, and previously the
attack
on the World Trade Centre on 11/9 the costly and
unnecessary nuclear deterrent doesn't seem to be working awfully well, does
it?

As there has been no nuclear wars, I would say the "nuclear deterrent"
has worked well.

What nation state would you target for a nuclear reprisal?

Let's start with Chippenham.

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur