"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
Was intended for alt.horology, a reference to pallet stones.

A most unconvincing attempt to cover up a major faux pas.

Your original post said:

"I wish to make a master oscillator for the shack, and am considering
cutting my own crystals in order to reduce ageing. Is there a source
of raw material?

Also, for temperature compensation, I am considering the use of bi-metals.
(I've never seen one, but what is the mechanism used in Oxley's
Tempatrimmer?)"


Let us examine this a little:

"make a master oscillator for the shack". Well that could be a construed as
referring to the 'balance wheel' in a clock (or watch) escapment but only by
a leap beyond the credible.

"own crystals in order to reduce ageing" The "crystals" used in the pallet
of an escapement are using usually synthethtic ruby and, while the changing
of their profile can contribute to a loss of accuracy, the 'ageing problem'
is wear on the escape wheel and, while this is related to the 'cut' of the
pallet stones, other aspects of the system accuracy determine the various
profiles in this area (in particular the need for the escape lever to
provide the impetus to the 'balance' wheel).

"I am considering the use of bi-metals." The escape mechanism in a clock (or
watch) is often temperature compensated but the mechanism is either on the
"balance" wheel (the radius is changed to vary the angular momentum) or the
balance spring (the tension being varied). Neither of these align with the
mechanism of a tempratrimmer.

As regards accuracy, the limits for a certified chronometer are -0 +5s per
day, if memory serves me correctly. There are far more practical ways to
achieve better than this without resorting to cutting pallet stones.

No Gareth, you were just trying to start another thread where you didn't
understand the topic. Having realised your error you are now trying to
divert the thread- as it happens into an area where your knowledge seems
equally challenged.

WRONG! It was intended as a joke, but from the headers,
only the NEGATIVE NERDS (of which group you are rapidly
becoming a member; no doubt the reason for your "Upgrade"
to a CB/M3 licence) in general responded.

Your response in general is one of obsessive sneering; a poor
reaction to the justifiable criticism of, and your loss of face due to,
your support for the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB
licence.

Your desperation to score points has blinded you.....

Brian Reay wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
Was intended for alt.horology, a reference to pallet stones.
A most unconvincing attempt to cover up a major faux pas.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
WRONG! It was intended as a joke,

Yes Gareth. Of course Gareth.

The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Your shameful support for the gangrenous degeneration that
is the M3/CB licence seems to have you proposing that because
you find fault, in YOUR opinion, with the technical viewpoint of those
who aspire to be _REAL_ Radio Hams, then that is full
justification for admitting the M3/CB licensees with no technical
viewpoint whatsoever. If that is your argument, then I disagree with you.

The _REAL_ Radio Ham will discuss technical issues, for example,
the dB, but the turnip brained will sneer at the age of a text-book without
actually citing or quoting the international conference in which his
falsely-believed redefinition took place.

Brian Reay wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
WRONG! It was intended as a joke,
Yes. Of course.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Ahhh - Brian Reay gets one up on you due to his skill of repairing clocks
and watches of varying technical design and now you've gone and started the
gangrenous degeneration line once more.

I recall this was a favourite of another poster within this group - start
to lose the argument and turn the subject back to one of your choosing or
simply insult....

Excellent!

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Your shameful support for the gangrenous degeneration that
is the M3/CB licence seems to have you proposing that because
you find fault, in YOUR opinion, with the technical viewpoint of those
who aspire to be _REAL_ Radio Hams, then that is full
justification for admitting the M3/CB licensees with no technical
viewpoint whatsoever. If that is your argument, then I disagree with you.


gangrenous degeneration, the cb'er etc etc

yawwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnn

I have a theory that you are not a real person but a machine with a
collection of pre-programmed phrases.... rather akin to the Texas
Instruments 'Speak And Spell'.

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in
:

The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Ahhh - Brian Reay gets one up on you due to his skill of repairing clocks
and watches of varying technical design and now you've gone and started the
gangrenous degeneration line once more.

I recall this was a favourite of another poster within this group - start
to lose the argument and turn the subject back to one of your choosing or
simply insult....

Excellent!

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Your shameful support for the gangrenous degeneration that
is the M3/CB licence seems to have you proposing that because
you find fault, in YOUR opinion, with the technical viewpoint of those
who aspire to be _REAL_ Radio Hams, then that is full
justification for admitting the M3/CB licensees with no technical
viewpoint whatsoever. If that is your argument, then I disagree with you.


gangrenous degeneration, the cb'er etc etc

yawwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnn

I have a theory that you are not a real person but a machine with a
collection of pre-programmed phrases.... rather akin to the Texas
Instruments 'Speak And Spell'.

The turnip-brain of the M3/CB licensee and his sneer?

Your shameful support for the gangrenous degeneration that
is the M3/CB licence seems to have you proposing that because
you find fault, in YOUR opinion, with the technical viewpoint of those
who aspire to be _REAL_ Radio Hams, then that is full
justification for admitting the M3/CB licensees with no technical
viewpoint whatsoever. If that is your argument, then I disagree with you.

The _REAL_ Radio Ham will discuss technical issues, for example,
the dB, but the turnip brained will sneer at the age of a text-book without
actually citing or quoting the international conference in which his
falsely-believed redefinition took place.

Brian Reay wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
WRONG! It was intended as a joke,
Yes. Of course.

My my - five similar replies from Gareth all aimed at Brian Reay;

I think you could say Gareth's thrown his toys out of his cot big style
with over one!!!!

What's the matter Gareth - are the other big boys picking on you again?

Ahhh - diddums!

Bwahahahahahahaahahaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ADW.