Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 7 2006 6:39 am Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm wrote: Tsk, tsk, you've TOLD ME what I should have done in the military... What did Jim TELL YOU that you should have been doing, Len? Was it something about not fabrication experience in combat? ....yet you've never served in the military or in the US government. I served 8 years in the US Army. At ease, old soldier. I served in the military and the U.S. government. Look what fabrications you've come up with on that. You can see and read what I did for three years there via: http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf 6 MB in size, takes about 19 minutes download on a dial-up connection. Twenty pages with many photo illustrations. High-power HF transmitters. 1953 to 1956. Reruns of "Look what I did". The other reason for Len's antics is so he can tell us, once again, the different things he's done. "It ain't braggin' if ya done it!" :-) It isn't "all that", Leonard Baby. Have you noticed that Len doesn't ask about what other people have done in *amateur* radio? And this is an *amateur* radio newsgroup! Tsk, I have done so. All that you've displayed (via links) is an old 70's era receiver, supposedly built for less than $100, on Kees Talen's website "HBR" pages (HomeBrew Receiver, after the various "HBR" articles in QST of decades ago). (Insert the profile of Leonard's actions here) Didja know Fessenden's 1906 "broadcast" used an alternator transmitter? I surely did. Of course that limited his voice-radio operations to below 100 kHz (3000 meters) Tsk, tsk, that was before 1920. 1920 is 86 years ago. Your ADA sojourn began about fifty-three years back, didn't it, Len? Why do you live in the past so much? Why do you live in the past so much? For a double-degreed education in things electrical you just displayed a surprising amount of ILL logic and definite misunderstanding of the real definition of "practical." Note the dig at my BSEE and MSEE degrees. What Len doesn't realize is that, in the history of electrical engineering, all sorts of now-incredible things were once considered practical. Some insist that "Greenlee Chassis Punches" are necessary for homebuilt radio construction. Who has insisted that, Len. Feel free to use a drill and a saber saw with a metal-cutting blade. Is ONLY "practical" for knocking out conduit attachment holes in electrical power distribution boxes or some 70s-era boatanchor construction project (i.e., using vacuum tubes and needing socket holes for same). That's a factual error as anyone who builds linear amplifiers, builds other electronic gear or installs a ball mount for an antenna on an automobile can tell you. Greenlee is still a corporation in Rockford, IL, but they seem to have stopped making "chassis punches" for radio hobbyists. There's another of your factual errors. Greenlee still sells chassis punches--round ones, square ones, those shaped for D-connectors, power sockets. There's even a hydraulic punch set. The U.S. Government buys loads of them. The company's "hole making" product information can be downloaded--all 7.9 mb of it. http://www.greenlee.com/product/index.html For example, the very first operational general-purpose electronic digital computer was the ENIAC, which was built at one of my alma maters here in Philadelphia. Its design and construction were paid for (some would say "subsidized") by the U.S. Army (some would say "the taxpayers"). Its original stated purpose was for the calculation of artillery aiming information. "Firing Tables" those are called, Jimmie. Ever spot artillery fall, Jimmie? Oh, you weren't IN the military! That's right... As I recall, you wrote a very well known piece about what it is like to undergo an artillery barrage. When and where did that take place, Len? Can your friend Gene confirm it? Some may point to machines like the Colossus, Mark 1 or even the ABC as the "first computer". But they all lack something that ENIAC had. Some, like the ABC and even Babbage's Difference Engine, were never fully operational. Some, like the Mark 1, used relays and mechanics for calculation, and were not really electronic. Some were built for a specific task, such as breaking codes, and were not really general purpose. Some were partly or entirely analog, such as the Differential Analyzer. ENIAC was the first to do it all. ENIAC "broke codes?" Really? "Did it all?" :-) Ever hear of 'the BSTJ?' That's the Bell System Technical Journal. Before the Bell break-up it was published (mostly) monthly. They had a nice write-up in it on the three electromechanical 'computers' that Bell Labs made for making Firing Tables during WWII. Good old "amateur radio subject in an amateur radio newsgroup!" :-) Didn't you just bring up your experiences at ADA? ENIAC took up an enormous amount of space and power, used over 17,000 tubes and required programming in machine language to do anything useful. Jimmie ever do any "programming in machine language?" At any time? I have. Want me to list them? :-) That's not necessary, Len. Why not tell us any of the things you've done in amateur radio? That's why I wrote the above ENIAC story. BFD. You went to Moore, "touched" the museum piece that it is. (insert the profile here) How many computers made today have a useful life as long as ENIAC? My HP Pavilion box for one. My wife's HP Pavilion for two. One hellishly FASTER clock rate than ENIAC, enormous RAM, ROM, and mass storage medium. Built about 4 years ago. Let us know if you replace it before eleven years. I got to see and touch parts of ENIAC. Wowee. I've touched the Liberty Bell at Independance Hall in Philly. Between the two, I'd much prefer the Liberty Bell. ENIAC is defunct. Liberty is NOT. Liberty is not a bell. Also read the papers on it. A machine that changed the world, made from very ordinary parts and techniques, assembled in a new way. PR minutae you spout. Hey! You were finally able to work in the plural form of the word. Webster's spells it "minutia" for singular, "minutiae" for plural. Len's should have chosen the singular. He made an error. Typical. Tsk, tsk, Jimmie lays on the MINUTAE in plural form so much that I was correct. :-) No, Len, you were not correct. You were corrected. WTF Moore School and ENIAC have to do with AMATEUR RADIO POLICY seems to have vanished in Jimmieworld. What was that url for the info about ADA? The main point is that it's not superfluous. Voice radio was "practical" enough for MW broadcasting by 1920 - that's not an opinion, it's a demonstrated fact. Yes. There is nothing currently underway to move toward anything in the near future to change amplitude modulation for medium wave broadcasting. There are AM BC receivers from the 1920s that, if restored, will perform admirably today in their intended purpose. Then let the Navy use them. :-) ["perform admirably" :-) ] Some NTSC TV sets from 60 years ago, if restored, can still be used to watch VHF TV. Why? Aren't those good for 80m "CW" transceiver parts? [rock-bound at 3.58 MHz... :-) ] "Cost less than $100...etc., etc., etc." :-) Of course HDTV will eventually replace NTSC. "Eventually?!?" The transition phase is and has been underway NOW, Jimmie. Here in the USA, not on some "website." Only a fraction of the American people are watching HDTV. Most aren't even aware of what will hit them in a couple of years. People are still running out to K-Mart and Wally World and buying new *analog* TV sets. Some compromise sets are being marketed as EDTV for "Enhanced Definition". Once you watch DTV in operation, side by side with an older NTSC set, the tremendous difference in DTV can be seen AND heard. With the truly flat-screen LCD, Plasma, or DLP display with a wider picture than possible with NTSC, the detail and expanse is striking with DTV. It'll be possible to watch DTV with a simple converter. Those will extend the life of analog televisions for many years. The Feds are even going to help pay for the converter boxes. I don't recall them doing that when the UHF-TV channels came into existence. There'll be a big learning curve for the non-city dwelling owners of new HDTV receivers. They'll find that they have to use antennas with fairly high gain, preamps and rotators. They'll be using those rotators quite often. I ended up buying a Channel Master rotator with remote control and memory. Jimmie say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" Tsk, Jimmie be the Amish of ham radio. Jimmie love horse-and-buggy comms using morse code? [note similarity of 'horse' and 'morse'] (insert profile here) He knows very little about me and has resorted to wild speculation and untruths for a long time. Tsk. Typical bluffmanship on Jimmie's part. It was an accurate statement, Leonard. You don't know much about Jim. You have resorted to wild speculation and untruths. He no say what he do but he IMPLIES lots. Sounds like a conspiracy to me. Sounds like that USMC Imposter Robeson's tactic. Why not bring his name up with your new recruiter friend. As an alternative, have Brian Burke contact "Stolen Valor". Jimmie keep things SECRET. Very hush-hush. Somebody say Jimmie know nothing, they "LIARS." Just like Robeson. You do washee? See above about ENIAC. It was very practical, in its time - but never repeated. ENIAC defuct. The same can't be said for you. Flunked in reliability, flunked in architecture (BCD accumulators/registers, not binary). NEVER repeated. A MUSEUM PIECE. As are you, dear Leonard. I'm still looking for a definition of "morsemanship" Poor baby. Can't understand it? Post-graduate degree and you still can't connect the dots? :-) He has a license which says he can connect the dots and the dashes. Do you have such documentation? Tsk, tsk, poor baby. My history sources go far beyond ARRL publications. And ARRL history isn't "bowdlerized". ARRL carefully OMITS certain items of history and IMPLIES amateurs are 'responsible' for all advances. :-) You've made another untruthful statement. Note the lack of a smiley. Beyond the Thomas White radio history pages, Jimmie not mention any of his "sources" that go beyond League publications. You're an old cut and paste man, Len. What do you normally do in such a situation? I was writing about non-amateur use of Morse Code in radio. Why Jimmie do dat? This be AMATEUR Radio newsgroup. What's that ADA url? Notice how Len doesn't mention any HF experience of his after ADA, except cb? WRONG. Civil avionics work included HF...used in US Aviation Radio Service. Maritime Radio Service includes personal use of an HF SSB transceiver (SGC-2020) two years ago. Contract work involved DoD design and evaluation which did not need my civilian Commercial operator license sign-off. All fine stuff, Len. I'm convinced. To do so would require not only a license, but assembling a station. "Plug and play" nowadays, was that way a half century ago. :-) Sure it is, Len. Just unbox your tower and antennas (all pre-assembled), set them up in the yard, connect a microphone and "Hello World". Right. Collins Radio used to make whole stations, quit the amateur radio market and still makes money. Don't they make whole stations anymore? Note that while Len talks endlessly about places he has worked and projects he has worked on, there's almost nothing about radio projects he has done himself, with his own money, at home. This newsgroup is Amateur Radio Policy, not Amateur Radio Homebrew. :-) It isn't alt.radio.commercial or alt.radio.military either, old boy. :-) Jimmie wanna see my home workshop? Have it digitized, was sent to three others. Wanna see the HP 608D and the 606 signal generators, the 60 MHz dual-channel scopes (note plural), the 1 KW Variac below the bench? You're kind of light in the Variac department, Len. Don't you have anything which will handle real power? Poor baby. Jimmie jealous? Jimmie work at just ONE employer his whole life? Jimmie NOT serve in military. Jimmie NOT serve in government. Jimmie "serves" the nation by his ham radio hobby? You're a pathetic and childish geezer, Len. You really need a way to fill your idle hours. There's the one-tube unlicensed oscillator transmitter of 1948, his conversion of some ARC-5s and their sale, the store-bought ICOM receiver and the compact Johnson....and not much else. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Two complete ARC-5 receiver-transmitters for 40 meters. Conversion earned me some money on resale. I still have one 6-9 MHz ARC-5 receiver that runs, assorted parts from both receivers and transmitters. Did that in 1948, not the "phonograph transmitter" built as a lark in 1947...which worked on the AM BC band and did not violate any FCC regulations at the time. :-) Maybe you could whip together a modern, solid state version of the phono oscillator and play at being a junior ham, Len. You could CQ, assign yourself an "XB-523" call and all. You might convince a neighbor to build one too. You could have a blast. Oh, my, a "store-bought Icom receiver!" Their model IC-R70. Paid for "in cash" (check, actually) at an HRO in Van Nuys, CA (later moved to two successive locations in Burbank, CA). Cost about $600 then. No problem, could afford it. Ask USMC Imposter Robeson about any of those HRO stores. He says he's been to two of them "with friends." :-) Surely he's fabricating. You could check with the recruiter and get some sort of investigation going right away. Would you like my old checkbook balance digitized so you can view it for your 'verification?' How about I digitize the receipt? Or do you want to wait for the famous Background Check that Paul seems to want done? :-) Paul didn't say anything about a background check, Len. He addressed the IEEE Code of Ethics. Oh, yeah, the "compact Johnson." The E. F. Johnson Viking Messenger is small but not necessarily compact. If you need some verification I can get some URLs for CB nostalgia types for you. It is a very tiny Johnson, Len. Your has been gathering dust for years. On the "compact johnson," your allusion to my penis, let's just say I've satisfied two wives and a dozen girlfriends with my "goodie woody." *Guffaw!* I'm sure that the story and equipment used with grow with the countless retellings, Leonard. Would you be satisfied with my primary physician's note on its size, digitized and sent to you? I would personally treasure such a document for the rest of my life, Leonard. It would confirm every notion I've ever had about your state of being, both physical and emotional. Or will you wait for Paul's Background Check to verify that bit of AMATEUR RADIO POLICY you want to talk about? Hmmm? You like penises, Jimmie? It sounds as if you're discussing superfluous minutae, Len. Plus if FCC *does* drop Element 1, what will Len do? Then I will drop the advocacy of eliminating the morse code test...as I have written many times in here. There would be no NEED for advocacy of eliminating that test since it had already been eliminated in that case. That isn't the same as saying that you'd be finished with advocating. Your statement addresses one very specific item. Tsk, you are SO unbelieving, all that FABRICATION about "reasons" you imagine! Poor baby. We've seen you in action for better than a decade. Tsk, task, poor baby. Len could have had a no-code tech ages ago. Len had a Commercial First 'Phone since 1956, has used that in many more places on the EM spectrum than are allowed to US radio amateurs. A commercial license can't be used in amateur radio, Len. Sorry. Mostly for money but some times just for fun. Are you discussing your tiny, dusty Johnson? See you on the air, Dave. Using very slow-scan ATV? Perhaps using morse code pixels? You have morse code glasses? Your Elecraft kit have a built-in spectrum analyzer? Video viewer? How about if we use any band or mode available to us? You, of course, may do as you can. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Dave Heil on Sun, Oct 8 2006 4:28 am
wrote: From: on Sat, Oct 7 2006 6:39 am Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm wrote: Tsk, tsk, you've TOLD ME what I should have done in the military... What did Jim TELL YOU that you should have been doing, Len? It's in the archives where Jimmie likes to live. :-) You can see and read what I did for three years there via: http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf 6 MB in size, takes about 19 minutes download on a dial-up connection. Twenty pages with many photo illustrations. High-power HF transmitters. 1953 to 1956. Reruns of "Look what I did". Not "I," old soldier-statesman, what *we* in the battalion did. 8235th Army Unit. It's for historical interest purposes. The only other one (a much larger one) is at www.usarmygermany.com that was put together by Walter Elkins about the Signal effort in Europe. If you sneer too much at the My3Years.pdf, then feel free to substitute AlphabetSoup.pdf, a copy of my battalion's own production of its mission tasks circa 1962. That courtesy of Mr. James Brendage, a retired civilian engineer who worked at ADA when I was serving there. If you don't like either of those, then substitute either one of the two remaining, one on microwave radio relay, the other on the SCR-300, both from a technical standpoint. The SCR-300 was the first walkie-talkie, a backpack VHF transceiver, introduced during WW2, designed and built by Galvin Mfg (later to be renamed Motorola). It's all about RADIO and COMMUNICATIONS. Your ADA sojourn began about fifty-three years back, didn't it, Len? Why do you live in the past so much? 1. I live for the now and the future, not the past. 2. There is no copyright restriction on government works, therefore no need to get written permission. 3. There is no security classification on the material I've presented...neither from the DoD nor private company non-disclosure agreements. Greenlee is still a corporation in Rockford, IL, but they seem to have stopped making "chassis punches" for radio hobbyists. There's another of your factual errors. My bad. :-) Does Greenlee take out ads in QST, QEX? How about Popular Communications? Any ads in there? Greenlee still sells chassis punches--round ones, square ones, those shaped for D-connectors, power sockets. There's even a hydraulic punch set. The U.S. Government buys loads of them. The company's "hole making" product information can be downloaded--all 7.9 mb of it. http://www.greenlee.com/product/index.html Are you on commission from Greenlee? :-) No sweat, old soldier-statesman, I've been IN Greenlee on a visit, have seen the little corner of one building where two guys were making punches and files. Send your download to Lowes or Home Depot corporate head- quarters, see if they are interested. I still have old Greenlee chassis punches from before the 60s, still wrapped in oily paper, get checked now and then for rust. They were all used decades ago...only two have been reground on the edges (did that myself, no problem). Not much use for those punches now in the solid-state era. Especially when there are so many KITS available for those who claim to design their own. :-) Jimmie ever do any "programming in machine language?" At any time? I have. Want me to list them? :-) That's not necessary, Len. Why not tell us any of the things you've done in amateur radio? You mean the software mods I made for two other hams don't apply? [Microchip Corp. PIC microcontrollers] How about a series of bandpass filters for the HF bands where I did the toroid windings, capacitor selection, assembly, shielding, and alignment? Using my own computer program "LCie4"? Oh, be still my heart, the great soldier-statesman has put me down! :-) Only a fraction of the American people are watching HDTV. Most aren't even aware of what will hit them in a couple of years. People are still running out to K-Mart and Wally World and buying new *analog* TV sets. Thank you for the attempt at being an electronics industry "insider." It is nice to know that someone cares. There'll be a big learning curve for the non-city dwelling owners of new HDTV receivers. They'll find that they have to use antennas with fairly high gain, preamps and rotators. They'll be using those rotators quite often. I ended up buying a Channel Master rotator with remote control and memory. That's nice. Are you going for some kind of amateur HDTV award or contest? He knows very little about me and has resorted to wild speculation and untruths for a long time. Tsk. Typical bluffmanship on Jimmie's part. It was an accurate statement, Leonard. You don't know much about Jim. You have resorted to wild speculation and untruths. How can something be "untrue" if there is NO basis to judge? Id est, as in his never saying...but you MUST call a speculation a LIE? Sounds like the old Waffen SS trick again. ARRL carefully OMITS certain items of history and IMPLIES amateurs are 'responsible' for all advances. :-) You've made another untruthful statement. My apology for offending your religious beliefs. However, the TRUTH is not heresy. Jimmie wanna see my home workshop? Have it digitized, was sent to three others. Wanna see the HP 608D and the 606 signal generators, the 60 MHz dual-channel scopes (note plural), the 1 KW Variac below the bench? You're kind of light in the Variac department, Len. Don't you have anything which will handle real power? Yes...it's labeled "4 Stacks" on aeronautical sectional charts. BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [pilot joke, old soldier-statesman] You're a pathetic and childish geezer, Len. Awwww...you are TOO sweet... :-) You really need a way to fill your idle hours. "Idle?" BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Paul didn't say anything about a background check, Len. He addressed the IEEE Code of Ethics. YOU addressed the IEEE Code of Ethics, failing to write all of it. Paul picked up on that and wanted to get in some kind of "fight" about it. YOU have the mailing address of the IEEE. Feel free to write them and complain about my behavior in the news- group and how that "violates" the Professional Code of Ethics about engineering WORK. Be sure and document everything from BOTH sides, such as your own name- calling ("You're a pathetic and childish geezer"). Tell the IEEE that your "soldier-statesman" image has been "tarnished" by "insults" in here. Go ahead, make your day. Are you discussing your tiny, dusty Johnson? No, but you seem to have overmuch interest in it. Did you munch a lot of nuts while in Guinea-Bisseau? [cashews are their biggest export...] As always to you, ByteBrothers famous phrase invoked... |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Dave Heil on Sat, Oct 7 2006 11:52 pm
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm wrote: It appears that Len expects me to reply to his "you have never..." statements by saying what I have done in non-amateur radio. Old trick, doesn't work. It works! :-) Jimmie just hasn't done anything outside. He has never been IN the military. He has never been IN government. He has never stated what he does for a living. It hasn't stopped him from trying. He has never become a radio amateur despite his several decades of self-declared "interest" in amateur radio. How about that? I became a professional BEFORE anything else! :-) The other reason for Len's antics is so he can tell us, once again, the different things he's done. He should just number them. Instead of typing all of those words over and over, he could just type something like "62." What, no "69?" [Cecil and I probably agree on that one...:-) ] If he tries a "you have never" and someone refutes it with details, Len simply clams up. Ah! "Justification" for that Imposter Robeson...a licensed amateur extra and a pro-coder! My, my, these pro-coders sure do hang together. Cosier that way. They would otherwise hang separately. :-) If they voluntarily post material describing something they've done, Len uses that as an opportunity for insulting the poster. I will insult any poster of Che Guevara I see. :-) Most political posters glued to vertical spaces are themselves insulting... ...and like ENIAC, Fessendon's feat was an advancement over what had previously been possible. "...had previously been possible." :-) I'm glad we don't need that sort of thing today. I don't have room for an ENIAC. Sure you do in that rambling country antenna farm. But, there's only ONE ENIAC and it is now a museum piece. Defunct. Good only for show-and-tell. I wonder if Len ever saw or touched ENIAC. Why is that "necessary?" :-) ...and a high quality, tube-type BC set from the 1950's sounds every bit as good as its modern, LSI counterpart. Enjoy your vacuum tube set...until one of the tubes burns out. :-) He knows very little about me and has resorted to wild speculation and untruths for a long time. I'm sure you have an idea of his reasons for digging for information. You WILL reveal to the forum your "reasons," won't you? Of course you will, you both are pro-code amateur extras, the 'superior' ones who know everything. :-) You MUST "profile" all those who don't agree with you. White's is very good - for what it covers. It essentially stops long before WW2. Its treatment is heavy on broadcasting, light on amateurs and nonbroadcasting commercial operation. IMHO. But Len refers to it as if it is the Bible. Not at all. Thomas H. White's radio history in the USA is large, illustrated, and readily accessible on the web. It was mentioned only because of its accessibility. McGraw-Hill's ELECTRONICS magazine of April 17, 1980, had a special commemorative Issue on their 50th anniversary. Volume 53, Number 9, 650 pages, excellent overview with many details, photographs from before Marconi's time to 1980. They didn't emphasize amateur radio because amateur radio was really a small player in that bigger game of electronics technology. Unless one was a subscriber to Electronics magazine or has access to a technical library, it isn't that easy to use as a reference. Hugh G. J. Aitken's "The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio," 1900-1932, Princeton University Press, 1985, 588 pages, soft cover, is a scholarly work, quite complete and sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Again, there isn't the highlighting of amateur radio a la ARRL but that is for the real reason that amateur radio wasn't considered a 'big player' in the technological development of radio. Aitken's earlier work, "Syntony and Spark: The Origins of Radio" was done in 1976, reprinted in 1985 by Princeton University Press. I don't have that handy at the moment so I can't describe its size but it is another soft- cover. Neither is readily available except from a technical library. What some amateurs call "The Collins Sideband Book," or "Single Sideband Principles and Circuits," Pappenfus, Bruene, and Schoenike, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964, 382 pages, has a good bit of HF communications history in Chapter 1 up to copyright date of the book, more in following chapters on various early SSB systems. A veritable cornucopia of radio-electronics historical information can be found on dozens of websites that don't inwardly focus just on amateur radio. One can start with the links listing at http://sujan.hallikainen.org down towards the bottom of the "Broadcast History" main page. Harold Hallikainen is a licensed radio amateur, by the way. From those links can be found much history of communications and electronics, even military such as Walter Elkins' www.usarmygermany.com website (huge, detailed history of post-WW2 US Army history in USAEUR). If you need to see a direct copy of US Army in the Far East circa 1962, download my Military (page) upload of http://sujan.hallikainen.org/BroadcastHistory/uploads/ AlphabetSoup.pdf. For things like the telecommunications infrastructure there are several sites about this service that is supposed to "fail" at every emergency (according to some popular but erroneous myths among some hams) such as the transcontinental microwave radio relay system by AT&T that was, developments of microwave vacuum tubes, slow-scan TV (other than amateur experiments), cellular telephony, indeed nearly every facet of "the telephone company." It might be noted that the microwave radio relay system was an integral part of US defense communications in the decades before 1980...which is opposite of the "always fails" claim of the infrastructure accusers. Some of that includes the Western Electric Company early work that helped bring the early vacuum tube into a reproducible, reliable product. At the IEEE website under "Milestones" (in electronics and electrical power distribution) is a number of firsts ("milestones") in technology, the where-when-who of each one. The IEEE spoken histories include interviews with many of the movers-and-shakers, major to minor, of the electronics industry, military, and aerospace field. For other history there is the Radio Club of America, the first membership organization in the USA and still organized, containing a number of biographies of notable radio pioneers and their work plus early radio sites and stories. At the Corning Frequency Control website (now acquired by another corporation ? and may have its URL altered) is several papers on the history of quartz crystal production in the USA before, during, and after WW2 by participants in that work. There exist a great number of websites on nearly all phases of electronics and radio, done by individuals or groups who have been there and done that without any "necessity" of first getting an amateur radio license, then being a part of the industry. Everything from a history of radio comms in California state and local police (many photos) to a specialty site about the SCR-300 walkie-talkie done by the son of the chief designer at Galvin (later Motorola). A New Jersey historical group has an extensive coverage of the Coles, Evans, and Squier Laboratories very near Fort Monmouth, NJ, the to-be-abandoned site of the US Army Electronics Command...included in that is a large description of the very first "moonbounce" dubbed Project Diana that took place just after WW2 ended. The number of places to get historical information on electronics (including radio) is immense on the Internet. It seems that many, many individuals have an INTEREST in the whole sphere of the technology without having to "get a ham license first." They were IN it before being told they HAD to get that "first permission to enter" from some blowhard control-freak ham. He usually follows one of those references with some sniping at the American Radio Relay League. There is no denying that the publications output of the ARRL is very large. They must do that in order to get the income necessary to perform all their "free" services to members. The ARRL has a virtual monopoly on amateur- interest publications in the USA...no denying that, either. But, the ARRL is also a political organization, maintaining both a legal firm and a lobbying organization in DC on retainer. As a political entity, they come under the good old American tradition of being a target for anyone who cares to comment. The League is NOT without fault...except in the minds of its faithful followers, the disciples of the Church of St. Hiram. Having a virtual monopoly on radio-amateur-interest publications also gives them a psychological power to mold readers' opinions to those of the League hierarchy. To deny that is to deny the power of marketing techniques, of psychological propaganda activities that go on daily in nearly all human activities. Do you need to review the profile? Len needs to review the profile. No. "Profiles" work both ways. Heil and Miccolis have both been "profiled" in here, not just by me but by many others. It is the Nature of the (newsgroup) Beast. Len seldom lets the truth get in the way of one of his monologues. Tsk, Heil speaks an untruth. OPINIONS are not "facts," just opinions. Miccolis tries to manuever all opinion statements as "facts" written by those he has problems with...thus garnering the "accusations" of "untruth" or "error" when some just plain don't like him. That he often comes across as an arch- typical "mother superior" (complete with spanking ruler) is lost on him. Prissy, as if sucking on sourballs when writing up "error" "error" on those disagreeing with him. Heil comes across as a stereotypical WW2 propaganda movie Waffen SS officer, ordering others around, telling them what they "should" do (his way, naturally). One can almost see the sneer on his face, the monocle ready to drop as his face gets more livid with order-barking, the heels clicking. I've noticed the talk of his workshop, but nothing about what comes out of it. Why should it? It is for MY enjoyment for myself, not some "hey-look-at-me-and-what-marvelous-things-I've-done" self promotion on some website. :-) I've had it for four decades. Those I know have been in it and we've talked mutual interest stuff about any project then on-going. Material like that has been exchanged privately. No need to make it public. All vine, no fruit. Southern California is not an ideal place for vinyards; mid-state is best: Napa, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties. California produces most of the wine consumed in the USA. Southern California climate is good for citrus. My 35- year-old lemon tree bears lemons all year around. The dwarf orange hybrid is almost as productive. For sure. SS is coming up fairly soon. "Waffen?" Jahwhol! [click, click] :-) |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sat, Oct 7 2006 11:52 pm wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm wrote: It appears that Len expects me to reply to his "you have never..." statements by saying what I have done in non-amateur radio. Old trick, doesn't work. It works! :-) Jimmie just hasn't done anything outside. There you go again, Mr. Anderson. You've told another untruth. He has never been IN the military. He has never been IN government. He has never stated what he does for a living. "Id est, as in his never saying...but you MUST call a speculation a LIE?" --Len Anderson Your statements don't indicate speculation. You have no information of the first two. I know for a fact that the third in false because he has stated to me what he does for a living. I'm aware of at least one other who knows what he does for a living. I guess you've been left out of the loop. It hasn't stopped him from trying. He has never become a radio amateur despite his several decades of self-declared "interest" in amateur radio. How about that? I became a professional BEFORE anything else! :-) I've never found it necessary to so limit myself. I was capable of being a professional in electronics and a radio amateur as well. I've have dozens of friends who've managed to do the same. If he tries a "you have never" and someone refutes it with details, Len simply clams up. Ah! "Justification" for that Imposter Robeson...a licensed amateur extra and a pro-coder! Did you ever find that web page, Len? My, my, these pro-coders sure do hang together. Cosier that way. They would otherwise hang separately. :-) Same tired line, presented on at least six or seven separate occasions. If they voluntarily post material describing something they've done, Len uses that as an opportunity for insulting the poster. I will insult any poster of Che Guevara I see. :-) Most political posters glued to vertical spaces are themselves insulting... You are juvenile. ...and like ENIAC, Fessendon's feat was an advancement over what had previously been possible. "...had previously been possible." :-) It makes sense to me. What fault did you find with the statement? I'm glad we don't need that sort of thing today. I don't have room for an ENIAC. Sure you do in that rambling country antenna farm. You think someone would place a room-sized computer in the middle of a field? But, there's only ONE ENIAC and it is now a museum piece. Defunct. Good only for show-and-tell. That pretty wells sums up your current situation, doesn't it? I wonder if Len ever saw or touched ENIAC. Why is that "necessary?" :-) Who said it was necessary, Len? ...and a high quality, tube-type BC set from the 1950's sounds every bit as good as its modern, LSI counterpart. Enjoy your vacuum tube set...until one of the tubes burns out. :-) Yeah, I guess I'd have to walk out to the barn and get another one. I have hundreds and hundreds of vacuum tubes, Len and if I didn't, there are still quite a number of places selling them. He knows very little about me and has resorted to wild speculation and untruths for a long time. I'm sure you have an idea of his reasons for digging for information. You WILL reveal to the forum your "reasons," won't you? Do I need to do so? It is pretty obvious from your decade of posts to the newsgroup. Of course you will, you both are pro-code amateur extras, the 'superior' ones who know everything. :-) I don't know everything, Len. I'm superior to you in a number of ways. You MUST "profile" all those who don't agree with you. No person who favors the retention of Morse testing has profiled anyone but you. White's is very good - for what it covers. It essentially stops long before WW2. Its treatment is heavy on broadcasting, light on amateurs and nonbroadcasting commercial operation. IMHO. But Len refers to it as if it is the Bible. Not at all. Thomas H. White's radio history in the USA is large, illustrated, and readily accessible on the web. It was mentioned only because of its accessibility. McGraw-Hill's ELECTRONICS magazine of April 17, 1980, had a special commemorative Issue on their 50th anniversary. Volume 53, Number 9, 650 pages, excellent overview with many details, photographs from before Marconi's time to 1980. They didn't emphasize amateur radio because amateur radio was really a small player in that bigger game of electronics technology. Unless one was a subscriber to Electronics magazine or has access to a technical library, it isn't that easy to use as a reference. Something contained in a single magazine cannot begin to cover much of the history of radio. Hugh G. J. Aitken's "The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio," 1900-1932, Princeton University Press, 1985, 588 pages, soft cover, is a scholarly work, quite complete and sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Again, there isn't the highlighting of amateur radio a la ARRL but that is for the real reason that amateur radio wasn't considered a 'big player' in the technological development of radio. Again with the "real reason"! Where in the book is that statement made, Leonard? Aitken's earlier work, "Syntony and Spark: The Origins of Radio" was done in 1976, reprinted in 1985 by Princeton University Press. I don't have that handy at the moment so I can't describe its size but it is another soft- cover. Neither is readily available except from a technical library. What some amateurs call "The Collins Sideband Book," or "Single Sideband Principles and Circuits," Pappenfus, Bruene, and Schoenike, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964, 382 pages, has a good bit of HF communications history in Chapter 1 up to copyright date of the book, more in following chapters on various early SSB systems. I have it and it isn't much of a history at all. He usually follows one of those references with some sniping at the American Radio Relay League. There is no denying that the publications output of the ARRL is very large. They must do that in order to get the income necessary to perform all their "free" services to members. What's it to you? The ARRL has a virtual monopoly on amateur- interest publications in the USA...no denying that, either. That is simply a false statement, Len. It is easily denied if one knows anything about publications available to the radio amateur. But, the ARRL is also a political organization, maintaining both a legal firm and a lobbying organization in DC on retainer. As a political entity, they come under the good old American tradition of being a target for anyone who cares to comment. ....and in the good old American tradition of having it not matter whether the comments are untruths. The League is NOT without fault...except in the minds of its faithful followers, the disciples of the Church of St. Hiram. I've had differences of opinion with League policy and League officers and staffers. What is any of that to you. You aren't a radio amateur and you aren't an ARRL member. Having a virtual monopoly on radio-amateur-interest publications also gives them a psychological power to mold readers' opinions to those of the League hierarchy. Good boy, Len. If you start with a false premise, you can always make your claim turn out the way you want it to. To deny that is to deny the power of marketing techniques, of psychological propaganda activities that go on daily in nearly all human activities. To deny your statement is to point out that your mind is made up about the ways things are and that you aren't going to let fact stand in your way. Nobody markets more than TV and radio. I can't tell you the last time I drank a soft drink, ate at Applebee's or shopped at Target because of a radio or TV ad. I've never bought a car based upon a magazine ad nor bought a suit because of a newspaper ad. Those virtual monopolies aren't getting their money's worth out of me. Do you need to review the profile? Len needs to review the profile. No. "Profiles" work both ways. ....only if they are factual. Those you wrote were cobbled together and fashioned after Jim's style. They didn't stick. Heil and Miccolis have both been "profiled" in here, not just by me but by many others. Many others? Where are they? It is the Nature of the (newsgroup) Beast. ....and you *are* the newsgroup beast. Len seldom lets the truth get in the way of one of his monologues. Tsk, Heil speaks an untruth. That's simply incorrect, Len. OPINIONS are not "facts," just opinions. I didn't write "opinions". I wrote "truth". You seldom let truth get in the way of one of your monologues. Miccolis tries to manuever all opinion statements as "facts" written by those he has problems with...thus garnering the "accusations" of "untruth" or "error" when some just plain don't like him. "Maneuver", Len. Your statement doesn't make sense. Don't you like Jim? Are the non-factual statements you issue done to show Jim that you don't like him? That he often comes across as an arch- typical "mother superior" (complete with spanking ruler) is lost on him. If you could see yourself as others see you, Len... Prissy, as if sucking on sourballs when writing up "error" "error" on those disagreeing with him. I'm sure it seems that way to a guy who makes a great many factual errors. Heil comes across as a stereotypical WW2 propaganda movie Waffen SS officer, ordering others around, telling them what they "should" do (his way, naturally). You have a rich fantasy life. What, pray tell, is your view of an individual who is not involved in any way in amateur radio, telling radio amateurs that regulations should be changed (ordering others around, telling them what they "should" do (his way naturally)? One can almost see the sneer on his face, the monocle ready to drop as his face gets more livid with order-barking, the heels clicking. Godwin will getcha if you don't watch out! What orders have been given, Len? I've noticed the talk of his workshop, but nothing about what comes out of it. Why should it? It is for MY enjoyment for myself, not some "hey-look-at-me-and-what-marvelous-things-I've-done" self promotion on some website. :-) That hasn't stopped your frequent self-promotion in this newsgroup. I've had it for four decades. Those I know have been in it and we've talked mutual interest stuff about any project then on-going. Material like that has been exchanged privately. No need to make it public. Do you recall the things you've said about Jim's work? I'm not going to do as you do and turn those words back toward you. You might want to think about what you typically do. For sure. SS is coming up fairly soon. "Waffen?" Jahwhol! [click, click] :-) You're a juvenile geezer, Len. Dave K8MN |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: Dave Heil on Sat, Oct 7 2006 11:52 pm wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm wrote: It appears that Len expects me to reply to his "you have never..." statements by saying what I have done in non-amateur radio. Old trick, doesn't work. It works! :-) Jimmie just hasn't done anything outside. There you go again, Mr. Anderson. You've told another untruth. No...Not LENNIE! He CAN'T tell a lie...He's a *PROFESSIONAL*... ! ! ! He has never been IN the military. He has never been IN government. He has never stated what he does for a living. "Id est, as in his never saying...but you MUST call a speculation a LIE?" --Len Anderson Your statements don't indicate speculation. You have no information of the first two. I know for a fact that the third in false because he has stated to me what he does for a living. I'm aware of at least one other who knows what he does for a living. Make it two. I guess you've been left out of the loop. Say it isn't so, Dave ! ! ! Lennie...?!?! "Out of the loop"...?!?!? Impossible! It hasn't stopped him from trying. He has never become a radio amateur despite his several decades of self-declared "interest" in amateur radio. How about that? I became a professional BEFORE anything else! I've never found it necessary to so limit myself. I was capable of being a professional in electronics and a radio amateur as well. I've have dozens of friends who've managed to do the same. Lennie's preoccupation with money being noted. No doubt the reason he married a woman with TWO correspondence degrees.... If he tries a "you have never" and someone refutes it with details, Len simply clams up. Ah! "Justification" for that Imposter Robeson...a licensed amateur extra and a pro-coder! Did you ever find that web page, Len? Lennie continues the "imposter" claim despite having been given detail private and public. Only further proof of his dishonesty and deceit. BIG SNIP But, there's only ONE ENIAC and it is now a museum piece. Defunct. Good only for show-and-tell. That pretty wells sums up your current situation, doesn't it? "Defunct" can sure be applied to a LOT of Lennie's issues. ANOTHER HUGE SNIP There is no denying that the publications output of the ARRL is very large. They must do that in order to get the income necessary to perform all their "free" services to members. What's it to you? Because there are "mere amateurs" who are making money publishing in the electronics field whereas Lennie is NOT. That's gotta leave a huge mark on the little guy's big ego. The ARRL has a virtual monopoly on amateur- interest publications in the USA...no denying that, either. That is simply a false statement, Len. It is easily denied if one knows anything about publications available to the radio amateur. CQ Magazine has a far greater offering of texts. But whoa-be-it to Lennie to actually get one of his anti-ARRL rants right..... AND AGAIN... Heil and Miccolis have both been "profiled" in here, not just by me but by many others. Many others? Where are they? Lennie's including his may alter-ego's... Miccolis tries to manuever all opinion statements as "facts" written by those he has problems with...thus garnering the "accusations" of "untruth" or "error" when some just plain don't like him. "Maneuver", Len. Your statement doesn't make sense. Don't you like Jim? Are the non-factual statements you issue done to show Jim that you don't like him? At least he didn't refer to Jim with a name ending, " -ie", Dave...Quite a step for him. That he often comes across as an arch- typical "mother superior" (complete with spanking ruler) is lost on him. If you could see yourself as others see you, Len... To her credit, his wife probably makes him wash it off outside, before he can get to a mirror to see what it looks like. Prissy, as if sucking on sourballs when writing up "error" "error" on those disagreeing with him. I'm sure it seems that way to a guy who makes a great many factual errors. Heil comes across as a stereotypical WW2 propaganda movie Waffen SS officer, ordering others around, telling them what they "should" do (his way, naturally). You have a rich fantasy life. And ocne again Lennie can't make headway with any rational comments, so he slides off into Naziland once again... What, pray tell, is your view of an individual who is not involved in any way in amateur radio, telling radio amateurs that regulations should be changed (ordering others around, telling them what they "should" do (his way naturally)? I could hear the hammer hitting that nail on the head from here, Dave. Why should it? It is for MY enjoyment for myself, not some "hey-look-at-me-and-what-marvelous-things-I've-done" self promotion on some website. That hasn't stopped your frequent self-promotion in this newsgroup. "Hey! Look at me! I bought a 1970-s era SWL receiver and scanner at the local ham shop and didn't need a license!" just isn't very inspiring, now is it, Dave...?!?! I've had it for four decades. Those I know have been in it and we've talked mutual interest stuff about any project then on-going. Material like that has been exchanged privately. No need to make it public. Do you recall the things you've said about Jim's work? I'm not going to do as you do and turn those words back toward you. You might want to think about what you typically do. Of course it's OK for Lennie to keep his affairs "private", yet when you, Jim or I do it, there's some conspiracy to hide something... How bogus, eh? For sure. SS is coming up fairly soon. "Waffen?" Jahwhol! [click, click] :-) You're a juvenile geezer, Len. TWO nails, Dave. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
shortwv | Shortwave | |||
178 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402  June 25, 2004 | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402  June 25, 2004 | General | |||
214 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (09-APR-04) | Shortwave |