![]() |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
In article ,
says... wrote in oups.com: Slow Code wrote: wrote in The late Dick Carrol/W0EX prided himself on being able to send code so poorly that even a computer code reader couldn't copy him. This was in order to prevent unworthy No-Code Technicians from eavesdropping on him. BTW, all the other Pro-Code Extras were good with it, coming up with cool, old-timey sounding excuses for such bad behavoir. "Banana Boat Swing" and "unique fist" were heard. A ham needn't try to produce CW that meets the Morse Code specification for dots, dashes, inter-dot/dash spacing, inter-character spacing, and inter-word spacing. He was pro-code but he wasn't trollish like me or WA8ULX were. At least you admit you're nothing but a troll. A useless low life peice of nothing troll. I believe in CW, but I'm not as Ruthless as I sound. Yes you are. You hate everyone who isn't like you. You are the biggest bigot around. I love to toss out things and then listen to everyone gasp. You love to try and **** off the world and you do a good job. ROFL. Don't you mean rolling on the floor drunk in your own filth!! I know, I know, it's sadistic... Yup, I've heard you're into that know. but it's fun, and maybe some will see and figure out the point of it. Theres no point to what you do and if you think there is you are truely ready for the sanitarium. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "Chris" wrote in message Already tried it. And dismissed it. esp dimissing the abilty of the human operator of the machine to fill in the problems and correct the process As I said while it is the best that is available, it is still far below the capabilities of a human operator. Correction. ...a few human operators. indeed the PC alone far exceeds the abilties of many licensed ham operators but hat doesn't count I've tried it under a wide range of conditions and CWGet still needs a pretty good signal to function. Dee, N8UZE Morse Myth #119: All CW signals are good signals (Its the corollary of Morse Myth #1: CW always gets through). Unrelated to my comments. You would like to think that, but without efforts from folks like Carl, Bill, Len, hans, myself and others, you would still be repeating such myths, and would never make statements such as "Not all CW signals are good." You can thank us, but that's probably not very likely. No one has said all CW signals are good. And they aren't. If they were always good, CWGet would always work, which it doesn't. The ones who tout the software solution are those who wish that it would always work. And those who dismiss the software solution think all amateur operators are superb morsemen. In addition, I have repeatedly stated that each and every mode has its advantages and disadvantages. If you were to compare and contrast all existing modes, it think it is likely that you would claim that CW is the best mode. The extremists on each side don't want to hear that. Dee, N8UZE Because of the efforts made to dismiss countless Morse Myths over the years, you were just now able to state that not all CW signals are good without 1x2 PCTAs pooh poohing such talk. well it is a thankless job Dees coming around in her own way, but the brainwashing that she's undergone is strong. Perhaps in another decade... if there's still an amateur radio. If only she had been able to think spontaneously and resist, the brainwashing wouldn't have been so well received. You are mistaken. I've always been one to think spontaneously. Since I have personally experienced conditions where it had to be CW or turn off the radio, I advocate all hams knowing code at a basic level. To insure that they do learn it at a basic level, testing at some point in the licensing is appropriate. Before entering these news I'd never heard much discussion either way on code. My opinions on its usefulness and desireability were formed based entirely on actual operating experience. I was surprised to learn that there was a big discussion on it in the amateur community. Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total the scores... I think you get the point. What point? Try thinking about it just a wee little bit. I did. It's not clear. Spell it out for us, please. I'll spell it out for you, Jim. Thank you, Brian! Any time. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. In addition, many hams whose licenses say "Technician" are code tested and have some HF privileges. These include: - all Tech Pluses who have renewed since April 15, 2000 - all Novices who have upgraded to Technician - all Technicians who have passed Element 1, but not the written exam for General Welp, that's something we'll just have to live with. It's also the reason I upgraded to General. btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. Probably most of the coded licensees never looked back when they learned the code to get past a licensing hurdle, don't use code, and couldn't if their lives depended on it. That's not a given at all. I would expect you to say something like that. Remember the ARRL survey that was debated so much here? The one where as a member, I did not receive a ballot? The one that Mike Deignan characterized as "substantive?" Yes, I recall the survey. Looked as if it had been developed by a bunch of dems hoping to influence the outcome of an election. You mean like this: http://www.rawstory.com/showoutartic...s/15869924.htm btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? It showed that less than 40% of those hams who were asked never used Morse Code. And it included licensees from all license classes, not just those who had passed code tests. Add to that those who rarely used code. Why? Even if someone rarely uses it, that means they still remember it and can use it at some level. It means they don't like it and they have to struggle through it. It means they are perfect candidates for CWGet. Sure there are those who learned just enough to pass the Morse Code test and then never used it - just as there are those who just enough to pass the *written* tests and then never used it Heck, your buddy Len couldn't even get the length of a 73 MHz quarter-wave whip antenna right, and he's a "PROFESSIONAL"! And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. You've repeatedly claimed that I mis-stated the distance from Earth to the moon on rrap. Show us where I did that - if you can. I don't think you can, because it did not happen. If I did it, show us. Otherwise you're just making things up. You're making that up. and you're a "professional." I've never claimed to be a professional astronomer. What? Only astronomers get to calculate path loss in space? Len claims to be a "PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics" (whatever that is) but he messes up on the length of an antenna for a radio service he has claimed to use. How can you be sure? So put all USA licensed amateurs in fron of a station equipped with a morse code key and with CWGet and total their scores. I presume you mean "contest scores" Why? Why not? They're operating in a CW Contest. Why wouldn't you total their scores? What's the point? The same point that you and W3RV are making when you kick around SSB vs CW in your field day and other scores. Why is it that comparing scores is only something that you can do? Who is going to set up and pay for all those stations? What sort of stations would they be - HF, VHF, UHF? What sort of antennas, rigs, computers? Think about it. I did. That's why I'm asking the question. Do you think the taxpayers should subsidize amateur radio stations? Who sets up your field day station? Who pays for it? The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... can bandy about the CQ WW and Field Day CW vs SSB contest scores all they want without having to standardize station equipment. I bring up a scenario and NOW station equipment must be standardized. Who said anything about standardizing station equipment? Not me. Yes, you. You! I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come from. Where do stations come from now? There's some bias in your approach. None at all. Hi, hi, hi! You're just making that up. Any ham who wants to operate Morse Code using CWGet or some other software can do so right now - if they have a station that includes rig, antenna, and computer. Yep. I can finally agree with something you said. So a version of the experiment you describe can happen in every contest. But it doesn't. Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... Yet I don't know of any amateur radio contesters who operate that way. Do you? Nobody knew of anyone who operated amateur radio as in Larry Rolls "Only CW can save the situation" but I NEVER ONCE saw your objection to it. So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted here in *years*. Sure he has. He's posted as himself and he's probably posting as someone else. I bring up a scenario and NOW you have a problems with how contestors operate. Not at all. I just don't see anyone using CWGet to operate a contest - even though they could. Heck *you* could. Why don't you? I don't enjoy morse code. There's some bias in your approach. None at all. I think you're making that up. Your "thought experiment" doesn't seem to be thought out very well. Sure it was. Alternative scenario snipped. Alternative scenario snipped. A simple, real-world challenge. What's the problem? The problem is that there isn't 100% participation in field day. It fails to meet the requirements of my scenario. The requirements for US amateur radio license have been slowly but steadily reduced for more than 25 years now. Just 25 years? I wrote "more than 25 years". I guess you forgot about the "Conditional" license where hams get an upgrade from their buddy. What does that mean? Besides, the Conditional stopped being issued about 30 years ago. Yep, but nobody ever claimed that amateur radio was being dumbed down. The USA amateur service has a proud history of it. How was it "dumbing down" to eliminate the Conditional? Jeez you're thick. No, Brian, I'm not "thick". You just did a poor job of explaining. No, you vectored off when it was clear that the creation of the Conditional Class license using the "buddy-system" of testing was the original dumbing down of the ARS. It was dumbing down to create such a license class. Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. Not just the code tests but also the writtens. That's not the fault of those taking the tests. No, of course not. It's not anyones fault except the FCC that they put offices so far away from ham's residences. ?? The reason FCC stopped doing testing was to save money. It doesn't cost the FCC anything for an amateur to show up for testing, unless you want to claim that the examinees got to file a voucher for their travel. Actually it cost FCC a lot of money to do testing. It was the travel distance that was key in the creation of the Conditional license, not the desire for the FCC to save money. I was writing about the reason the FCC stopped doing license testing for *all* license classes. That's part of the reduction in requirements. Then you strayed off the subject. Try to stay on the subject. I am on the subject. You're trying to change it. If you choose to comment on somthing I say, then confine it to what I said. If you stick with that simple concept, you'll do OK. First off, they had to have offices with test facilities. The office they had in Philadelphia back when I took my exams was on the 10th floor of the Custom House at 2nd and Chestnut. Lots of square feet of prime real estate just for the exam room. Then there was the time of the examiners, all of whom worked for FCC. Pay and benefits. At least two people per office, three days a week. Times the number of offices all over the country. Then add the FCC folks who revised the exams, duplicated them, and distributed them to the various offices all over the country. And the cost of doing all that. The VE system eliminated all that expense. All FCC has to do now wrt amateur license testing is to look over the QPC submissions and approve them. And occasionally retest somebody. That's all wunnerful, but you vectored off of the subject. Nope. Maybe next time you'll be able to cut and paste something germane to the subject. The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving over the testing to VEs. Nope. I twas the creation of the Conditional License. Eliminating Element 1 will not save the FCC any expense. Keeping it will not cost them anything, either. Maybe that's why it's taking them so long. Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in the rules for the last 3 R&Os. Why should they? Is there any doubt? There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. Yet they tell you that the exam myst be 5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means. It's not a problem to anyone with common sense. It appears to be a violation of Part 97. They replaced their paid examiners with unpaid volunteers. Good thing there wasn't a union. Why? Are you anti-union? No. Are you? Do you favor scabs? Bandages are better. It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't use any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed. I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it.. Brian, do you think that using a false sexist claim is somehow going to cause you to win the debate? No false sexist claim. It's a sexist claim to assume that Dee's husband takes care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of her station Why? She said she hardly, if ever, used it. Somebody's got to be doing it? You're presuming she's not doing what needs to be done, and is dependent on someone else to deal with the theory. I don't think that's the case at all. If I considered your opinion to be wrong, do I get to call you a liar? Why would you do that? Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar? You're making that up, right? W3RV uses his sister to put up antennas for him these days. Where do you get that idea? Hmmm? I've put up antennas with W3RV. Or rather, I helped out a little, since he had it all worked out on his own. No sisters involved. He does know quite a lot about antennas, particularly the practical side. He even knows that a quarter wave at 73 MHz is a lot longer than three and one quarter inches.... Prolly for illegal operation. He has no authorization in that area. Actually, he does. Part 95 remote control, same as your buddy Len. And everybody else. Part 95 requires no authorization, so he doesn't. And knowing his background, he'd probably violate the Part 95 rules. Fair is fair, yes? You're not fair at all. Since you have a corner on the fairness market, do you plan to be the RRAP Moderator? Wait and see. ARRL November CW Sweepstakes starts Saturday afternoon and ends Sunday night. I'll be there - will you? Nope, but knock yourself out. I'll be awake and operating. CWGet won't be part of it. Bless you. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
In article , says... There you go again. Don't wonder who I am, go enjoy ham radio. :) and tell people they need to learn code. SC RadioGuy wrote: I know who you are!!!!! Would you care to share that with the rest of us? C'mon, spill the beans. We're dying to know if "slow" even has a license. :-) |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am
wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Miccolis also insisted that ENIAC was "the first electronic computer" because he got brainwashed by Moore School PR, being in eastern PA. Funny thing, but the LAW was decided in the early 1970s by a Federal Court trial and the Atanasof- Berry Computer of 1939-1942 was declared "first." btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. ...and they can all toss their morse keys into the dumpster. :-) btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? ...and why in hell should WE care? And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. If'n Jimmie he say "mistaken" he be da Judge! He be da Law! :-) You've repeatedly claimed that I mis-stated the distance from Earth to the moon on rrap. Show us where I did that - if you can. I don't think you can, because it did not happen. If I did it, show us. Otherwise you're just making things up. You're making that up. Miccolis ought to move to L.A. and get in the make-up biz. Lotsa money to be made here in the entertainment capitol of show business. Especially around Halloween time...:-) and you're a "professional." I've never claimed to be a professional astronomer. What? Only astronomers get to calculate path loss in space? A quarter-million-mile distance was in all the newspapers since the Apollo Program began. Perhaps he thinks only astronomers read newspapers? :-) Len claims to be a "PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics" (whatever that is) but he messes up on the length of an antenna for a radio service he has claimed to use. How can you be sure? Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) That's all in the sense of "justice, fair play, common sense, (etc.)" to "HELP" others. :-) The same point that you and W3RV are making when you kick around SSB vs CW in your field day and other scores. Why is it that comparing scores is only something that you can do? He has declared himself Ultimate Authority, therefore 'judge.' The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... The "Four Morsemen of the Apocalypse." :-) I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come from. Where do stations come from now? The stork brings them from Japan? :-) Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. Blasphemy! Heresy! The Church of St. Hiram may begin the Inquisition with you tied on the stake, Brian! But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... Hmmm...interesting mental picture...350 thousand radio amateurs on the few HF ham bands ALL busy 'contesting' in relatively the same time period. That would result in the Ultimate QRM that would cause meltdown of all the scores checkers... :-) So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted here in *years*. Sure he has. He's posted as himself and he's probably posting as someone else. Las Vegas odds-makers are with your assessment... :-) I just don't see anyone using CWGet to operate a contest - even though they could. Heck *you* could. Why don't you? I don't enjoy morse code. We can only, repeat ONLY, "see" what Miccolis sees. All else is a 'mistake.' Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. By all those olde-tyme morsemen REFUSING to allow modernization of the US amateur radio service in going to, and trying out NEW modes, methods, and lobbying for UPDATING the ARS regulations. BTW, Miccolis hasn't existed since AFTER the end of WW II, let alone the creation of the FCC in 1934...but he is "knowledgeable" by "experience" of all those old pioneers (in his heart he knows he is 'right'). Miccolis hadn't learned to read yet when the amateur SSB boom began...over two decades AFTER the commercial and military radio world had begun using SSB for long-haul HF comms. He has NO direct experience to the radio world of the 1950s except in some juvenile way. He wasn't working for a living among amateurs who were divided about the SSB issues nor was he party to some of those amateurs' (of long standing then) rather abject ignorance of basic modulation concepts. [John Carson of AT&T had published the mathematical proof in 1915, the basis of the 'phasing' concept...the rest of the radio world accepted Carson's proof and those specializing in FM adopted "Carson's Rule" on FM modulation index] Miccolis never tuned up any SSB transmitter in the early 1950s as I had to do, never QSYed one. Not on HF and sure as hell not IN the military (he never served). Neither did he tune up or QSY any RTTY of MUX TTY transmitter on HF in that time frame. But...he "knows" all about it by reading about it in QST and the ARRL Handbook. Miccolis is a MORSEMAN. Those of the "CW gets through when nothing else will" DUMBED-DOWN amateur persuasion. All they can conceive is switching RF off and on using morse code. Methods that were used in the very first 'radios' of the Spark Tx and 'crystal detector' era. On-off keying of a CW carrier. Wow, real "technical" and full of smarts to bang- bang switch a carrier! Did the ARRL *ever* lobby to improve regulations for the 'new' modes in the ARS? Hell, the DSSS and FHSS modes were kept hamstrung by ARS regulations into the 1990s...when the commercial and military radio services were already using DSSS and FHSS...DSSS being the major player in the commercial WLAN and 'wireless' market. RTTY is still struggling along with OLD speed limits. PSK31 was innovated by a Brit (Peter Martinez) and was trial-tested in Europe for five years before it got any publicity in US ham magazines. Non-US hams have been using PM for extremely-weak radio comms for years, on bands below the lowest allocated US ham bands; the ARRL is finally getting around to 'requesting help' for frequencies as 'low' as a small sliver just above 500 KHz, helped get an 'experimental net' going there in this new millennium. Wow, really 'advanced technology' there, "exploring 'long wave' comms" with "CW." "CW gets through when nothing else will." One of the 1930s era MYTHS, born when hams were trying out DSB AM in days before WW II. "CW" does NOT 'get through' better than PM or some of the other modes, but the DUMBED-DOWN morsemen just can't understand that. They think that OOK CW is "smart!" 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. Try to stay on the subject. I am on the subject. You're trying to change it. If you choose to comment on somthing I say, then confine it to what I said. If you stick with that simple concept, you'll do OK. Brian, you KNOW Miccolis will NEVER do that. He runs off at the keyboard into dozens of wild trips off the thread. Mainly it is an attempt at MISDIRECTION so he won't have to explain his own errors, mistakes, false assumptions, and general ignorance of ALL radio, not the kind of radio that was spoon-fed to him by ARRL publications. First off, they had to have offices with test facilities. The office they had in Philadelphia back when I took my exams was on the 10th floor of the Custom House at 2nd and Chestnut. Lots of square feet of prime real estate just for the exam room. Then there was the time of the examiners, all of whom worked for FCC. Pay and benefits. At least two people per office, three days a week. Times the number of offices all over the country. [Yawn...like Philly is the Center of the USA? I can't remember the floor of the FCC Field Office in the Federal Building in Chicago, IL, as it was located in 1956...other than it was upstairs...might have been the 3rd floor, but the location wasn't important. Several being examined for Radiotelegraph licenses were audible QRM in the same room when I took my Radiotelephone written test (lots of Great Lakes shipping used "CW" then) The Chicago FCC office didn't need "lots of room for equipment"...one paper-tape code reproducer was good enough and the jacks for various keys didn't take up much space. Tables and chairs for examinees was standard government-issue stuff, tables too high and chairs uncushioned to make all uncomfortable] [The Long Beach, CA, FCC Field Office of today is only slightly better. Was never there for any test (didn't need to), only to get a pile of paper for own business radio (non-amateur) cleared away. By that time the FCC was busy, busy, busy with lots of commercial radio and the new radio services and the rather explosive growth of PLMRS that was opening the "high band"] Then add the FCC folks who revised the exams, duplicated them, and distributed them to the various offices all over the country. And the cost of doing all that. [Apparently Miccolis thinks ALL the FCC does is to regulate amateur radio?!? He is blissfully UNaware of the fantastic growth of ALL radio services in the last half century. He still won't acknowledge the COLEM (who do privatized testing of non- amateur radio operator licenses) nor of the privatized PLMRS frequency coordinators nor of the fact of reduced paperwork and licensing of the private maritime radio users (Long Beach is at the heart of the maritime import-export top harbor and in the center of dozens of large marinas). The FCC is concerned with regulation of ALL US civil radio services, not just amateur.] Maybe next time you'll be able to cut and paste something germane to the subject. The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving over the testing to VEs. Nope. I twas the creation of the Conditional License. Miccolis did his misdirection thing, then attempted to impose 'lawn order' by saying HE was 'judge' over what was being discussed. Gotta love it. He's been doing that for years... and manages to get away with it. :-) Then he gets caught and he bleats, "Show me where? Provide the posting!" He has been "hurt" or maybe "insulted" when folks disagree with him, poor guy. Eliminating Element 1 will not save the FCC any expense. Keeping it will not cost them anything, either. Maybe that's why it's taking them so long. Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in the rules for the last 3 R&Os. Why should they? Is there any doubt? There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. "It's for newcomers' own good" is probably the morsemen's only good-enough answer. Yawn...keep on with 1906 thinking in 2006, morse code uber alles...blah, blah, blah... Yet they tell you that the exam myst be 5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means. It's not a problem to anyone with common sense. It appears to be a violation of Part 97. It's a grey area in LEGAL terms. The WORD RATE is not specifically defined in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R., and only "assumed." FCC's Definitions cite the old CCITT-ITU Telegram regulation as to coding and bit and length spacings. That referenced International Telegram Standard doesn't specifically define WORD RATE either. Apparently the FCC gave the VEC Council written permission to do characters at the higher rate, keeping the 'word rate' at 5 words per minute. A problem is that this specific "permission" has NOT made it into the (radio regulation) LAW document yet. That makes it the "grey area" in legal terms since it can be argued both ways. REAL attorneys can comment on whether or not I am "mistaken." Miccolis hasn't been admitted to a Legal Bar Association yet and is unqualified to comment on law. But, he WILL comment on that AS IF he IS the law...("truth, justice, and the American way" spoken by SuperHam) Happy Halloween, Brian. |
I wish RadioGuy would stop humping my leg.
One Hung Low wrote in
. net: RadioGuy wrote: I know who you are!!!!! Would you care to share that with the rest of us? C'mon, spill the beans. We're dying to know if "slow" even has a license. :-) RadioGuy is like a little hyperactive poodle. He runs around, barks, maybe nips at your heels but not much because he scared of his shadow and he craps everywhere, but he's basically harmless and answers to Papa Dog. I just wish he'd stop humping my leg. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
RadioGay wrote in
: In article , says... wrote in oups.com: Slow Code wrote: wrote in The late Dick Carrol/W0EX prided himself on being able to send code so poorly that even a computer code reader couldn't copy him. This was in order to prevent unworthy No-Code Technicians from eavesdropping on him. BTW, all the other Pro-Code Extras were good with it, coming up with cool, old-timey sounding excuses for such bad behavoir. "Banana Boat Swing" and "unique fist" were heard. A ham needn't try to produce CW that meets the Morse Code specification for dots, dashes, inter-dot/dash spacing, inter-character spacing, and inter-word spacing. He was pro-code but he wasn't trollish like me or WA8ULX were. At least you admit you're nothing but a troll. A useless low life peice of nothing troll. I believe in CW, but I'm not as Ruthless as I sound. Yes you are. You hate everyone who isn't like you. You are the biggest bigot around. I love to toss out things and then listen to everyone gasp. You love to try and **** off the world and you do a good job. ROFL. Don't you mean rolling on the floor drunk in your own filth!! I know, I know, it's sadistic... Yup, I've heard you're into that know. but it's fun, and maybe some will see and figure out the point of it. Theres no point to what you do and if you think there is you are truely ready for the sanitarium. When you get a hard-on for someone you really get a hard-on. I don't know who you think I am but I feel sorry for them. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
RadioGuy wrote in
: In article .net, says... "Dr.Ace" wrote in : "Thats Right_ 20wpm" wrote in message ... Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is the Jammer because no one listens to him. Probably because he doesn't have an amateur radio license . Ace - WH2T Tnx, 73, good luck in the contest. SC You know you don't have a license. RG PS - I know who you are! You haven't got a clue. If RRAP were Wheel of Fortune, I'd tell you to buy a vowel. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
RadioGuy wrote in
: In article , says... There you go again. Don't wonder who I am, go enjoy ham radio. :) and tell people they need to learn code. SC I know who you are!!!!! You haven't got a clue. Now turn on your CB, maybe your no-code friends are calling. When you get tired of crapping on the group Learn CW. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Miccolis also insisted that ENIAC was "the first electronic computer" because he got brainwashed by Moore School PR, being in eastern PA. Funny thing, but the LAW was decided in the early 1970s by a Federal Court trial and the Atanasof- Berry Computer of 1939-1942 was declared "first." btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. ...and they can all toss their morse keys into the dumpster. :-) Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? ...and why in hell should WE care? I just don't get it. And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. If'n Jimmie he say "mistaken" he be da Judge! He be da Law! :-) I'm not buying it. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License You've repeatedly claimed that I mis-stated the distance from Earth to the moon on rrap. Show us where I did that - if you can. I don't think you can, because it did not happen. If I did it, show us. Otherwise you're just making things up. You're making that up. Miccolis ought to move to L.A. and get in the make-up biz. Lotsa money to be made here in the entertainment capitol of show business. Especially around Halloween time...:-) God knows the "Professional" PCTAs can't Kiss and Make-Up. and you're a "professional." I've never claimed to be a professional astronomer. What? Only astronomers get to calculate path loss in space? A quarter-million-mile distance was in all the newspapers since the Apollo Program began. Perhaps he thinks only astronomers read newspapers? :-) Only "Professional" Astronomers can write space articles in teh newspapers. Len claims to be a "PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics" (whatever that is) but he messes up on the length of an antenna for a radio service he has claimed to use. How can you be sure? Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! That's all in the sense of "justice, fair play, common sense, (etc.)" to "HELP" others. :-) Jim is so helpful. I recall asking for the formula to calculate a coil to match an end-fed half-wave antenna to 50 ohm coax. Then I got told right off that I should have a different kind of antenna and then the stomp fest began. The same point that you and W3RV are making when you kick around SSB vs CW in your field day and other scores. Why is it that comparing scores is only something that you can do? He has declared himself Ultimate Authority, therefore 'judge.' With these guys, its just a comedy of errors. The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... The "Four Morsemen of the Apocalypse." :-) There's only two now. A sign of the times. I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come from. Where do stations come from now? The stork brings them from Japan? :-) I don't think the stork can pass a security background investigation. Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. Blasphemy! Heresy! The Church of St. Hiram may begin the Inquisition with you tied on the stake, Brian! Are they getting bored with Copernicus? But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... Hmmm...interesting mental picture...350 thousand radio amateurs on the few HF ham bands ALL busy 'contesting' in relatively the same time period. That would result in the Ultimate QRM that would cause meltdown of all the scores checkers... :-) Log sheets full of faked QSOs. So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted here in *years*. Sure he has. He's posted as himself and he's probably posting as someone else. Las Vegas odds-makers are with your assessment... :-) He can post anon all he wants, but the damage is done under his name and call sign. Ever wonder why you see someone "reply" without adding anything? They're making sure it stays in the archives. I just don't see anyone using CWGet to operate a contest - even though they could. Heck *you* could. Why don't you? I don't enjoy morse code. We can only, repeat ONLY, "see" what Miccolis sees. All else is a 'mistake.' But I really don't enjoy morse code. Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. By all those olde-tyme morsemen REFUSING to allow modernization of the US amateur radio service in going to, and trying out NEW modes, methods, and lobbying for UPDATING the ARS regulations. BTW, Miccolis hasn't existed since AFTER the end of WW II, let alone the creation of the FCC in 1934...but he is "knowledgeable" by "experience" of all those old pioneers (in his heart he knows he is 'right'). He feels a special kinship with them, and through that kinship he has served in other ways. Miccolis hadn't learned to read yet when the amateur SSB boom began...over two decades AFTER the commercial and military radio world had begun using SSB for long-haul HF comms. An OSU Alum put SSB radios in airplanes. Oh, what was his name? He has NO direct experience to the radio world of the 1950s except in some juvenile way. He wasn't working for a living among amateurs who were divided about the SSB issues nor was he party to some of those amateurs' (of long standing then) rather abject ignorance of basic modulation concepts. [John Carson of AT&T had published the mathematical proof in 1915, the basis of the 'phasing' concept...the rest of the radio world accepted Carson's proof and those specializing in FM adopted "Carson's Rule" on FM modulation index] He sure was a funny guy. I used to stay up late to watch him. Miccolis never tuned up any SSB transmitter in the early 1950s as I had to do, never QSYed one. Not on HF and sure as hell not IN the military (he never served). Neither did he tune up or QSY any RTTY of MUX TTY transmitter on HF in that time frame. But...he "knows" all about it by reading about it in QST and the ARRL Handbook. He can tell you all about the contributions that the ARS made during WW II, except that the ARS wasn't authorized during WW II. Miccolis is a MORSEMAN. Those of the "CW gets through when nothing else will" DUMBED-DOWN amateur persuasion. All they can conceive is switching RF off and on using morse code. Methods that were used in the very first 'radios' of the Spark Tx and 'crystal detector' era. On-off keying of a CW carrier. Wow, real "technical" and full of smarts to bang- bang switch a carrier! Did the ARRL *ever* lobby to improve regulations for the 'new' modes in the ARS? Hell, the DSSS and FHSS modes were kept hamstrung by ARS regulations into the 1990s...when the commercial and military radio services were already using DSSS and FHSS...DSSS being the major player in the commercial WLAN and 'wireless' market. RTTY is still struggling along with OLD speed limits. PSK31 was innovated by a Brit (Peter Martinez) and was trial-tested in Europe for five years before it got any publicity in US ham magazines. Non-US hams have been using PM for extremely-weak radio comms for years, on bands below the lowest allocated US ham bands; the ARRL is finally getting around to 'requesting help' for frequencies as 'low' as a small sliver just above 500 KHz, helped get an 'experimental net' going there in this new millennium. Wow, really 'advanced technology' there, "exploring 'long wave' comms" with "CW." It's like Deja Vu all over again. "CW gets through when nothing else will." One of the 1930s era MYTHS, born when hams were trying out DSB AM in days before WW II. "CW" does NOT 'get through' better than PM or some of the other modes, but the DUMBED-DOWN morsemen just can't understand that. They think that OOK CW is "smart!" 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. Sam Morse desinged his code to be marked on a tape with a pen. Try to stay on the subject. I am on the subject. You're trying to change it. If you choose to comment on something I say, then confine it to what I said. If you stick with that simple concept, you'll do OK. Brian, you KNOW Miccolis will NEVER do that. He runs off at the keyboard into dozens of wild trips off the thread. Mainly it is an attempt at MISDIRECTION so he won't have to explain his own errors, mistakes, false assumptions, and general ignorance of ALL radio, not the kind of radio that was spoon-fed to him by ARRL publications. 200 Meters and Down. The Bible of St. Hiram. First off, they had to have offices with test facilities. The office they had in Philadelphia back when I took my exams was on the 10th floor of the Custom House at 2nd and Chestnut. Lots of square feet of prime real estate just for the exam room. Then there was the time of the examiners, all of whom worked for FCC. Pay and benefits. At least two people per office, three days a week. Times the number of offices all over the country. [Yawn...like Philly is the Center of the USA? I can't remember the floor of the FCC Field Office in the Federal Building in Chicago, IL, as it was located in 1956...other than it was upstairs...might have been the 3rd floor, but the location wasn't important. Several being examined for Radiotelegraph licenses were audible QRM in the same room when I took my Radiotelephone written test (lots of Great Lakes shipping used "CW" then) The Chicago FCC office didn't need "lots of room for equipment"...one paper-tape code reproducer was good enough and the jacks for various keys didn't take up much space. Tables and chairs for examinees was standard government-issue stuff, tables too high and chairs uncushioned to make all uncomfortable] [The Long Beach, CA, FCC Field Office of today is only slightly better. Was never there for any test (didn't need to), only to get a pile of paper for own business radio (non-amateur) cleared away. By that time the FCC was busy, busy, busy with lots of commercial radio and the new radio services and the rather explosive growth of PLMRS that was opening the "high band"] I've never met anyone from tha FCC. I saw Riley at Dayton. Ed Hare, too, but I don't confuse the ARRL for the FCC like lotsa hams do. Then add the FCC folks who revised the exams, duplicated them, and distributed them to the various offices all over the country. And the cost of doing all that. [Apparently Miccolis thinks ALL the FCC does is to regulate amateur radio?!? He is blissfully UNaware of the fantastic growth of ALL radio services in the last half century. He still won't acknowledge the COLEM There's a famous ARS VEC who is also COLEM. They had me take sumptin that looked surprisingly like an Amateur Advanced exam, then I got a GROL in the mail. (who do privatized testing of non- amateur radio operator licenses) nor of the privatized PLMRS frequency coordinators nor of the fact of reduced paperwork and licensing of the private maritime radio users (Long Beach is at the heart of the maritime import-export top harbor and in the center of dozens of large marinas). The FCC is concerned with regulation of ALL US civil radio services, not just amateur.] I don't think they realize that. Maybe next time you'll be able to cut and paste something germane to the subject. The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving over the testing to VEs. Nope. I twas the creation of the Conditional License. Miccolis did his misdirection thing, then attempted to impose 'lawn order' by saying HE was 'judge' over what was being discussed. Gotta love it. He's been doing that for years... and manages to get away with it. :-) We're on to it.... Then he gets caught and he bleats, "Show me where? Provide the posting!" He has been "hurt" or maybe "insulted" when folks disagree with him, poor guy. Only Jim can feel strongly about the ARS. Eliminating Element 1 will not save the FCC any expense. Keeping it will not cost them anything, either. Maybe that's why it's taking them so long. Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in the rules for the last 3 R&Os. Why should they? Is there any doubt? There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. "It's for newcomers' own good" is probably the morsemen's only good-enough answer. That's exactly what they say. "Thank you sir, may I have another?" Ultimately, they've confused a "Learning Method" with a REGULATORY requirement. Yawn...keep on with 1906 thinking in 2006, morse code uber alles...blah, blah, blah... 200 Meters and Down. Yet they tell you that the exam myst be 5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means. It's not a problem to anyone with common sense. It appears to be a violation of Part 97. It's a grey area in LEGAL terms. The WORD RATE is not specifically defined in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R., and only "assumed." FCC's Definitions cite the old CCITT-ITU Telegram regulation as to coding and bit and length spacings. That referenced International Telegram Standard doesn't specifically define WORD RATE either. Apparently the FCC gave the VEC Council written permission to do characters at the higher rate, keeping the 'word rate' at 5 words per minute. A problem is that this specific "permission" has NOT made it into the (radio regulation) LAW document yet. That makes it the "grey area" in legal terms since it can be argued both ways. REAL attorneys can comment on whether or not I am "mistaken." Miccolis hasn't been admitted to a Legal Bar Association yet and is unqualified to comment on law. But, he WILL comment on that AS IF he IS the law...("truth, justice, and the American way" spoken by SuperHam) Booo. It's important to deny access to prospective amateurs based upon something so ill defined. "Keeps the riff-raff out." Happy Halloween, Brian. Happy, happy, Len. Rained cats and dogs all day, drizzled during the trick or treat period. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: Then why do the military service have technical schools to do somehting so very simple? I guess it is because of the raw material they have to work with. Always a kind word for our armed forced... Armed forced? Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Is Oracle an Extra? What's his call? Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Dave K8MN Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. No, Brian, they are not. It has been explained to you. I just don't get it. I'm aware of that. Dave K8MN |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: Then why do the military service have technical schools to do somehting so very simple? I guess it is because of the raw material they have to work with. Always a kind word for our armed forced... Armed forced? Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? I didn't write it. You did. Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. ....but one had to at least be a high school graduate to enter the Air Force. That didn't mean that everyone who entered the Air Force was particularly bright or had prior experience in a field related to an Air Force career field. Of those who *were* bright and experienced in a field, there was no guarantee that they'd be placed in an AFSC related to their experience. A member of my basic training flight had some medical school. He became a Security Policeman. A fellow with electronics skills was made a cook. Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. I don't know anyone who experienced "grave disappointment" or anyone who has written anything like that. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. I knew it without consulting Wikipedia. If I'd meant "Lackland", I'd have written "Lackland". Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. So you're asking if I caught stories about the military? Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Is Oracle an Extra? What's his call? Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Bill Gates never gave up on code either. Dave K8MN |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Yes, you are, Brian. You just won't admit it. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. When? As of October 30, the number of current, unexpired FCC issued amateur radio licenses was: Novice: 24,155 Technician: 287,293 Technician Plus: 34,851 General: 131,966 Advanced: 70,602 Extra: 108,545 Total 657,412. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. The current number of Technicians amounts to 43.7006017...% of the total. That's not half. Some of them are code-tested, too. They are all Technicians now. That is an untruth. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. The number of Technician Plus licenses is shrinking as Technician Pluses are renewed as Technician, expire, or upgrade. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Yet some Technicians have passed a Morse Code test, and have some HF privileges. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Which requires that they retain a document showing their qualification. Like keeping a copy of their old Technician Plus license. However, that's not the point. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. The number of Technician Plus licenses is shrinking as Technician Pluses are renewed as Technician, expire, or upgrade. In addition, many hams whose licenses say "Technician" are code tested and have some HF privileges. These include: - all Tech Pluses who have renewed since April 15, 2000 - all Novices who have upgraded to Technician - all Technicians who have passed Element 1, but not the written exam for General Welp, that's something we'll just have to live with. It's also the reason I upgraded to General. Bully for you. btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. But they don't. Probably most of the coded licensees never looked back when they learned the code to get past a licensing hurdle, don't use code, and couldn't if their lives depended on it. That's not a given at all. I would expect you to say something like that. Remember the ARRL survey that was debated so much here? The one where as a member, I did not receive a ballot? The one that Mike Deignan characterized as "substantive?" Yes, I recall the survey. Looked as if it had been developed by a bunch of dems hoping to influence the outcome of an election. You mean like this: http://www.rawstory.com/showoutartic...s/15869924.htm btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? Doesn't matter. The choice last time wasn't the same, anyway. Which candidate do you think I should vote for? It showed that less than 40% of those hams who were asked never used Morse Code. And it included licensees from all license classes, not just those who had passed code tests. Add to that those who rarely used code. Why? Even if someone rarely uses it, that means they still remember it and can use it at some level. It means they don't like it and they have to struggle through it. Not necessarily. An amateur could "rarely" use Morse Code because they "rarely" get on the air. Or because they use some other mode a lot more. It means they are perfect candidates for CWGet. So? Sure there are those who learned just enough to pass the Morse Code test and then never used it - just as there are those who just enough to pass the *written* tests and then never used it Heck, your buddy Len couldn't even get the length of a 73 MHz quarter-wave whip antenna right, and he's a "PROFESSIONAL"! And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. Glad to see you admit your mistake. So put all USA licensed amateurs in fron of a station equipped with a morse code key and with CWGet and total their scores. I presume you mean "contest scores" Why? Why not? They're operating in a CW Contest. Why wouldn't you total their scores? What's the point? The same point that you and W3RV are making when you kick around SSB vs CW in your field day and other scores. What point is that? W3RV and I actually participate in Field Day, and actually make the scores we claim. The QSOs are real. Why is it that comparing scores is only something that you can do? You can compare scores all you want. How many points did you make in last year's Field Day? Who is going to set up and pay for all those stations? What sort of stations would they be - HF, VHF, UHF? What sort of antennas, rigs, computers? Think about it. I did. That's why I'm asking the question. Do you think the taxpayers should subsidize amateur radio stations? Who sets up your field day station? Who pays for it? Depends on whether I'm operating solo, or as part of a group. The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... can bandy about the CQ WW and Field Day CW vs SSB contest scores all they want without having to standardize station equipment. I bring up a scenario and NOW station equipment must be standardized. Who said anything about standardizing station equipment? Not me. Yes, you. You! That's another untruth. Show where I said that - I don't think you can. I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come from. Where do stations come from now? Don't you know? Any ham who wants to operate Morse Code using CWGet or some other software can do so right now - if they have a station that includes rig, antenna, and computer. Yep. I can finally agree with something you said. So a version of the experiment you describe can happen in every contest. But it doesn't. Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. Then your experiment won't happen. But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... Offered by whom? Who would pay for those things and set them up? How would you get 100% participation? Yet I don't know of any amateur radio contesters who operate that way. Do you? Nobody knew of anyone who operated amateur radio as in Larry Rolls "Only CW can save the situation" but I NEVER ONCE saw your objection to it. So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted here in *years*. Sure he has. He's posted as himself and he's probably posting as someone else. You mean "Slow Code"? That's probably WA8ULX. I bring up a scenario and NOW you have a problems with how contestors operate. Not at all. I just don't see anyone using CWGet to operate a contest - even though they could. Heck *you* could. Why don't you? I don't enjoy morse code. Then what is your point? A simple, real-world challenge. What's the problem? The problem is that there isn't 100% participation in field day. So? It fails to meet the requirements of my scenario. It's not about *your* impossible scenario. The requirements for US amateur radio license have been slowly but steadily reduced for more than 25 years now. Just 25 years? I wrote "more than 25 years". I guess you forgot about the "Conditional" license where hams get an upgrade from their buddy. What does that mean? Besides, the Conditional stopped being issued about 30 years ago. Yep, but nobody ever claimed that amateur radio was being dumbed down. The USA amateur service has a proud history of it. How was it "dumbing down" to eliminate the Conditional? Jeez you're thick. No, Brian, I'm not "thick". You just did a poor job of explaining. No, you vectored off when it was clear that the creation of the Conditional Class license using the "buddy-system" of testing was the original dumbing down of the ARS. Another untruth by you. Why was the creation of the Conditional a "dumbing down"? It had the same test requirements as General. It was dumbing down to create such a license class. Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. Why was it a "dumbing down"? Not just the code tests but also the writtens. That's not the fault of those taking the tests. No, of course not. It's not anyones fault except the FCC that they put offices so far away from ham's residences. ?? The reason FCC stopped doing testing was to save money. It doesn't cost the FCC anything for an amateur to show up for testing, unless you want to claim that the examinees got to file a voucher for their travel. Actually it cost FCC a lot of money to do testing. It was the travel distance that was key in the creation of the Conditional license, not the desire for the FCC to save money. I was writing about the reason the FCC stopped doing license testing for *all* license classes. That's part of the reduction in requirements. Then you strayed off the subject. Another untruth. Try to stay on the subject. I am on the subject. You're trying to change it. If you choose to comment on somthing I say, then confine it to what I said. Why? You're not the moderator. Besides, you don't confine your comments to what someone else said. Why should others confine their comments to what you said? If you stick with that simple concept, you'll do OK. First off, they had to have offices with test facilities. The office they had in Philadelphia back when I took my exams was on the 10th floor of the Custom House at 2nd and Chestnut. Lots of square feet of prime real estate just for the exam room. Then there was the time of the examiners, all of whom worked for FCC. Pay and benefits. At least two people per office, three days a week. Times the number of offices all over the country. Then add the FCC folks who revised the exams, duplicated them, and distributed them to the various offices all over the country. And the cost of doing all that. The VE system eliminated all that expense. All FCC has to do now wrt amateur license testing is to look over the QPC submissions and approve them. And occasionally retest somebody. That's all wunnerful, but you vectored off of the subject. Nope. Maybe next time you'll be able to cut and paste something germane to the subject. The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving over the testing to VEs. Nope. I twas the creation of the Conditional License. Why was that a "dumbing down"? Eliminating Element 1 will not save the FCC any expense. Keeping it will not cost them anything, either. Maybe that's why it's taking them so long. Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in the rules for the last 3 R&Os. Why should they? Is there any doubt? There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. The Morse Code test consists of 5 minutes of Morse Code. How many words are in those tests? At 5 wpm, there would be 25 At 13 wpm, there would be 65 At 15 wpm, there would be 75 (A word is 5 characters) Yet they tell you that the exam myst be 5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means. It's not a problem to anyone with common sense. It appears to be a violation of Part 97. Only to someone without common sense. They replaced their paid examiners with unpaid volunteers. Good thing there wasn't a union. Why? Are you anti-union? No. Are you? Do you favor scabs? Bandages are better. It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't use any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed. I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it.. Brian, do you think that using a false sexist claim is somehow going to cause you to win the debate? No false sexist claim. It's a sexist claim to assume that Dee's husband takes care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of her station Why? She said she hardly, if ever, used it. Somebody's got to be doing it? You're presuming she's not doing what needs to be done, and is dependent on someone else to deal with the theory. I don't think that's the case at all. If I considered your opinion to be wrong, do I get to call you a liar? Why would you do that? Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar? You're making that up, right? I'm asking a question. Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar? W3RV uses his sister to put up antennas for him these days. That's an untruth. Where do you get that idea? Hmmm? I've put up antennas with W3RV. Or rather, I helped out a little, since he had it all worked out on his own. No sisters involved. He does know quite a lot about antennas, particularly the practical side. He even knows that a quarter wave at 73 MHz is a lot longer than three and one quarter inches.... Prolly for illegal operation. He has no authorization in that area. Actually, he does. Part 95 remote control, same as your buddy Len. And everybody else. Part 95 requires no authorization, so he doesn't. Incorrect. Part 95 authorizes everyone, as long as they meet the requirements. And knowing his background, he'd probably violate the Part 95 rules. Why? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... wrote: Then why do the military service have technical schools to do somehting so very simple? I guess it is because of the raw material they have to work with. Always a kind word for our armed forced... Armed forced? Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? I didn't write it. You did. Correct. I made a typo. You chose to trip over it. You pretend to be stupid and not understand. Too bad for you. Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. ...but one had to at least be a high school graduate to enter the Air Force. That didn't mean that everyone who entered the Air Force was particularly bright or had prior experience in a field related to an Air Force career field. Of those who *were* bright and experienced in a field, there was no guarantee that they'd be placed in an AFSC related to their experience. A member of my basic training flight had some medical school. He became a Security Policeman. A fellow with electronics skills was made a cook. They call that "Air Force needs..." The AF needs SPs and Cooks, too, or didn't you know that? Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. I don't know anyone who experienced "grave disappointment" or anyone who has written anything like that. I guess others know you better than you know yourself. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. I knew it without consulting Wikipedia. If I'd meant "Lackland", I'd have written "Lackland". Yet you place punctuation outside of parenthesis as if you were writing code for a machine instead of writing language for a person. You need to work on your interpersonal communications skills. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. So you're asking if I caught stories about the military? There's that stupid face again. Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Is Oracle an Extra? What's his call? Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Bill Gates never gave up on code either. Dave K8MN He punctuates correctly. See where it got him? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
"One Hung Low" wrote in message . net... Would you care to share that with the rest of us? C'mon, spill the beans. We're dying to know if "slow" even has a license. :-) The Magic 8 Ball say's "No Way" . Ace - WH2T |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT. Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own typographical errors...forever and ever... :-) Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered as direct combat military branches by draftees worried silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is. Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining communications 24/7. Military personnel placement types MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they have for a communications specialty. When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-) Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on, but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-) What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-) No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing) from their original form. The official archives in St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has them for proof by anyone with access. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-) Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as a civilian. I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T" receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG). The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of the Army in the later 1940s). "Getting the message through" at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a HOBBY. There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale) folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television) Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even "fight" for ratings. It is show biz. MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS. It was never essential to military communications despite the civilian hoopla attached to it. From the 1990s onward, MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US government...and doing good at that...using military MARS personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use phone patches to talk direct to family and friends. But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what Heil actually did. He hasn't described it in anything but vague generalities and intimations of work performed. To use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one hostile action" action. :-) Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts." Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio. [he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ] Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE." Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code." Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Very much so! :-) A few billion bucks here, a few billion bucks there...might even add up to real money! (paraphrasing Yogi Berra) [thanks to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for all their many chartitable contributions worldwide!] I just don't think Bill Gates (or Paul Allen) much give a **** for morse "code." :-) I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't "morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of a million "words per second." [based on the average number of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman that can come close to that. :-) My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that 1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50 KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the 3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box] But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use. Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief... 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 5:52 pm
wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Ooops. Without inserting the word "TEST" in "Code-free" will automatically alert Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis to run off again with his "helpful correction of mistakes." :-) The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Tsk, Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis will HAVE to "reply" with his "helpful correction of mistakes" a la the mighty macho morseman style of "knowing what is best for amateur radio" (as He sees it...). Miccolis also insisted that ENIAC was "the first electronic computer" because he got brainwashed by Moore School PR, being in eastern PA. Funny thing, but the LAW was decided in the early 1970s by a Federal Court trial and the Atanasof- Berry Computer of 1939-1942 was declared "first." btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. ...and they can all toss their morse keys into the dumpster. :-) Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. True enough...and the OTHER half had to take a morse code TEST to get that AMATEUR license. btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? ...and why in hell should WE care? I just don't get it. Miccolis must think the rest of us live in HIS reality (or rather ego-geographic-center-of-the-universe). In another week we Californians (about 30 million of us) will be voting on a number of state and local issues. "Weldon and Sestak" don't seem to be on that ballot. And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. If'n Jimmie he say "mistaken" he be da Judge! He be da Law! :-) I'm not buying it. Neither am I. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License A mere 17 years ago there was no such thing as a "code-free" (meaning No Morse Code TEST) amateur radio license. You've repeatedly claimed that I mis-stated the distance from Earth to the moon on rrap. Show us where I did that - if you can. I don't think you can, because it did not happen. If I did it, show us. Otherwise you're just making things up. You're making that up. Miccolis ought to move to L.A. and get in the make-up biz. Lotsa money to be made here in the entertainment capitol of show business. Especially around Halloween time...:-) God knows the "Professional" PCTAs can't Kiss and Make-Up. It must be a violation of their "professional" code of ethics? :-) Usually to those kind of folks I just tell them to Kiss my ass. I've given that up on my MD's advice, he say I might catch something dangerous... :-) and you're a "professional." I've never claimed to be a professional astronomer. What? Only astronomers get to calculate path loss in space? A quarter-million-mile distance was in all the newspapers since the Apollo Program began. Perhaps he thinks only astronomers read newspapers? :-) Only "Professional" Astronomers can write space articles in teh newspapers. Riiiight. :-) Len claims to be a "PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics" (whatever that is) but he messes up on the length of an antenna for a radio service he has claimed to use. How can you be sure? Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. True enough. They don't have ONE consideration that I saw my error and posted my own correction of it. On every 'QWERTY' keyboard there is one key with an (unshifted) apostrophe and a (shifted) double-quote. In the shorthand version of dimensioning, a foot is denoted by the suffix of an apostrophe while an inch is denoted by the suffix of double quote. As an example, my height can be written 5' 10" or, in longer form, five feet ten inches. In rapid typing (I learned touch-typing in middle school) it is possible to make a mistake in too much pressure on the Shift key and inadvertently type in the double-quote. But...in the Grand Inquisitor manner of the might macho morsemen, a type by an NCTA is a CAPITAL OFFENSE, punishable by a lifetime of message comments about that typo...and NEVER acknowledging that it was corrected! Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! HAR!!! :-) [Heil went to 'Ding Dong School'? :-)] That's all in the sense of "justice, fair play, common sense, (etc.)" to "HELP" others. :-) Jim is so helpful. I recall asking for the formula to calculate a coil to match an end-fed half-wave antenna to 50 ohm coax. Then I got told right off that I should have a different kind of antenna and then the stomp fest began. I remember. Somewhere along that line, Reg Edwards' ready-to- go small computer program was mentioned. Reg is a UK ham of long time and has a bunch of small programs made just for many particular amateur radio applications. If you still have a need, I'll dig out his URL and post it here. Reg appears in rec.radio.amateur.homebrew once in a while. The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... The "Four Morsemen of the Apocalypse." :-) There's only two now. A sign of the times. They can't see the signs! Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. Blasphemy! Heresy! The Church of St. Hiram may begin the Inquisition with you tied on the stake, Brian! Are they getting bored with Copernicus? Could be...all the NCTA must appear as Galileo to them... I don't enjoy morse code. We can only, repeat ONLY, "see" what Miccolis sees. All else is a 'mistake.' But I really don't enjoy morse code. According to Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis, anyone trying morse code "WILL" like it! :-) [at least he didn't go balls-out and say what he must have meant..."anyone trying morse code SHALL like it" :-) ] Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. By all those olde-tyme morsemen REFUSING to allow modernization of the US amateur radio service in going to, and trying out NEW modes, methods, and lobbying for UPDATING the ARS regulations. BTW, Miccolis hasn't existed since AFTER the end of WW II, let alone the creation of the FCC in 1934...but he is "knowledgeable" by "experience" of all those old pioneers (in his heart he knows he is 'right'). He feels a special kinship with them, and through that kinship he has served in other ways. I get the impression he really, Really, REALLY want to BE THERE doing that "pioneering." But, he really, Really, REALLY wasn't there doing that... Miccolis hadn't learned to read yet when the amateur SSB boom began...over two decades AFTER the commercial and military radio world had begun using SSB for long-haul HF comms. An OSU Alum put SSB radios in airplanes. Oh, what was his name? Art Collins? :-) Hmmm...I thought he went to ISU, not OSU. USAF SAC was the igniter of the single-channel SSB use and Collins Radio of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, got the contracts. Never mind that RCA Corporation ALSO got the contracts and supplied single-channel SSB on HF to the USAF. Collins had the more-savvy-PR and started selling to the commercial world and to amateurs. Collins Radio got started with Art making transmitters to-order before WW II. RCA didn't go the full- on route of marketing, probably too busy doing the bigger thing with television. He has NO direct experience to the radio world of the 1950s except in some juvenile way. He wasn't working for a living among amateurs who were divided about the SSB issues nor was he party to some of those amateurs' (of long standing then) rather abject ignorance of basic modulation concepts. [John Carson of AT&T had published the mathematical proof in 1915, the basis of the 'phasing' concept...the rest of the radio world accepted Carson's proof and those specializing in FM adopted "Carson's Rule" on FM modulation index] He sure was a funny guy. I used to stay up late to watch him. Ahem. John Carson of AT&T wasn't the same as Johnny Carson of NBC Tonight Show fame. :-) But I am a fan of both... Miccolis never tuned up any SSB transmitter in the early 1950s as I had to do, never QSYed one. Not on HF and sure as hell not IN the military (he never served). Neither did he tune up or QSY any RTTY of MUX TTY transmitter on HF in that time frame. But...he "knows" all about it by reading about it in QST and the ARRL Handbook. He can tell you all about the contributions that the ARS made during WW II, except that the ARS wasn't authorized during WW II. ...not to mention that Miccolis never ever served in any military. :-( "CW gets through when nothing else will." One of the 1930s era MYTHS, born when hams were trying out DSB AM in days before WW II. "CW" does NOT 'get through' better than PM or some of the other modes, but the DUMBED-DOWN morsemen just can't understand that. They think that OOK CW is "smart!" 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. Sam Morse desinged his code to be marked on a tape with a pen. True enough and recorded history of 1844. On some history website there is a digitized image of the famous "What hath God wrought" message marked on tape. Smithsonian? Alfred Vail, benefactor of Morse, came up with a CHANGE of "morse code" from the original all-numbers scheme to the representation of each English letter to a dot-dash combo. About the same time Morse and the Vail railroad works just couldn't make a reliable pen mechanism. Radio was tried in 1895 by Marconi in Switzerland, using only the presence of a radio signal. In 1896 Marconi sent simple character groups in morse code for a public demonstration in Italy. In the same year Aleksandr Popov in Russia. 1896 is FIFTY-TWO YEARS AFTER the first Morse-Vail Telegraph System debuted in Baltimore, MD. This 'morse code' thing was rather mature by 1896. The point about 'morse code' is that it was technologically SIMPLE. An electrical circuit is either on or off. Early radio was technologically SIMPLE. Transmitters' "RF output" was either on or off. Morse code was used because the two SIMPLE things were compatible. It is total bull**** to imagine that morse code had some kind of "state-of-the-art" magic at the beginning. It was technologically CONVENIENT, established (in wireline comms), and mature (lots of morse code operators after 52 years of use worldwide). I've never met anyone from tha FCC. I saw Riley at Dayton. Ed Hare, too, but I don't confuse the ARRL for the FCC like lotsa hams do. You must mean the 'Dayton Hamvention?' :-) Gotta be EXACT in everything in here lest the mighty macho morsemen try to be "helpful" with their "mistake corrections"! Sometimes I think the ARRL confuses itself with all those "official" things it has. It's a clever descriptor for whatever they are describing, gives it some glow of 'authority.' [Apparently Miccolis thinks ALL the FCC does is to regulate amateur radio?!? He is blissfully UNaware of the fantastic growth of ALL radio services in the last half century. He still won't acknowledge the COLEM There's a famous ARS VEC who is also COLEM. They had me take sumptin that looked surprisingly like an Amateur Advanced exam, then I got a GROL in the mail. You mean the 'W5YI Group?' :-) Mighty macho morseman Miccolis probably thinks Fred is a Golem, not a COLEM. :-) (who do privatized testing of non- amateur radio operator licenses) nor of the privatized PLMRS frequency coordinators nor of the fact of reduced paperwork and licensing of the private maritime radio users (Long Beach is at the heart of the maritime import-export top harbor and in the center of dozens of large marinas). The FCC is concerned with regulation of ALL US civil radio services, not just amateur.] I don't think they realize that. ...or they don't care to acknowledge it. Then he gets caught and he bleats, "Show me where? Provide the posting!" He has been "hurt" or maybe "insulted" when folks disagree with him, poor guy. Only Jim can feel strongly about the ARS. Miccolis belongs to another ARS: Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society. There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. "It's for newcomers' own good" is probably the morsemen's only good-enough answer. That's exactly what they say. "Thank you sir, may I have another?" [ "What? You want 'more!?!" :-) ] Ultimately, they've confused a "Learning Method" with a REGULATORY requirement. Sigh...ain't it da troot? REAL attorneys can comment on whether or not I am "mistaken." Miccolis hasn't been admitted to a Legal Bar Association yet and is unqualified to comment on law. But, he WILL comment on that AS IF he IS the law...("truth, justice, and the American way" spoken by SuperHam) Booo. It's important to deny access to prospective amateurs based upon something so ill defined. "Keeps the riff-raff out." Yes, all must do as the Morsemen do, marching in ranks to the morse drum-beat! All not with the Hive Mind are "riff-raff," bottom-river-scum...etc., etc. All must do 1906 thinking in the year 2006! :-( |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Yes, you are, Brian. You just won't admit it. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. When? As of October 30, the number of current, unexpired FCC issued amateur radio licenses was: Novice: 24,155 Technician: 287,293 Technician Plus: 34,851 General: 131,966 Advanced: 70,602 Extra: 108,545 Total 657,412. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. The current number of Technicians amounts to 43.7006017...% of the total. That's not half. Some of them are code-tested, too. They are all Technicians now. That is an untruth. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. Of course they do. They used to be Tech Plusses, a distinctly different class of license. The number of Technician Plus licenses is shrinking as Technician Pluses are renewed as Technician, expire, or upgrade. They're Technicians now, perhaps they just don't know it. They'll find out soon enough The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Yet some Technicians have passed a Morse Code test, and have some HF privileges. So? Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Which requires that they retain a document showing their qualification. Like keeping a copy of their old Technician Plus license. Or a copy of a CSCE 1a. However, that's not the point. FCC still counts Technician Plus separately from Technician. So? They were once a distinctly different license class. No more. The number of Technician Plus licenses is shrinking as Technician Pluses are renewed as Technician, expire, or upgrade. Oh, well. In addition, many hams whose licenses say "Technician" are code tested and have some HF privileges. These include: - all Tech Pluses who have renewed since April 15, 2000 - all Novices who have upgraded to Technician - all Technicians who have passed Element 1, but not the written exam for General Welp, that's something we'll just have to live with. It's also the reason I upgraded to General. Bully for you. Thank you. btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use Morse Code. And they can all use CWGet. But they don't. And not too many are left that use CW at all. Probably most of the coded licensees never looked back when they learned the code to get past a licensing hurdle, don't use code, and couldn't if their lives depended on it. That's not a given at all. I would expect you to say something like that. Remember the ARRL survey that was debated so much here? The one where as a member, I did not receive a ballot? The one that Mike Deignan characterized as "substantive?" Yes, I recall the survey. Looked as if it had been developed by a bunch of dems hoping to influence the outcome of an election. You mean like this: http://www.rawstory.com/showoutartic...s/15869924.htm btw, next Tuesday I get to choose between Curt Weldon and Joe Sestak. Which do you think I should vote for? Who did you vote for last time? Doesn't matter. The choice last time wasn't the same, anyway. Which candidate do you think I should vote for? Which one do you think you should vote for? It showed that less than 40% of those hams who were asked never used Morse Code. And it included licensees from all license classes, not just those who had passed code tests. Add to that those who rarely used code. Why? Even if someone rarely uses it, that means they still remember it and can use it at some level. It means they don't like it and they have to struggle through it. Not necessarily. Yes, absolutely! ;^) An amateur could "rarely" use Morse Code because they "rarely" get on the air. Or because they use some other mode a lot more. Are you among the Deignan's that call that survey "substantive?" It means they are perfect candidates for CWGet. So? Sure there are those who learned just enough to pass the Morse Code test and then never used it - just as there are those who just enough to pass the *written* tests and then never used it Heck, your buddy Len couldn't even get the length of a 73 MHz quarter-wave whip antenna right, and he's a "PROFESSIONAL"! And you couldn't even get the distance to the moon, You are mistaken. Right. Glad to see you admit your mistake. Like on CW, it's easy to get the wrong message even when you can spell out the whole word in complete sentences. So put all USA licensed amateurs in fron of a station equipped with a morse code key and with CWGet and total their scores. I presume you mean "contest scores" Why? Why not? They're operating in a CW Contest. Why wouldn't you total their scores? What's the point? The same point that you and W3RV are making when you kick around SSB vs CW in your field day and other scores. What point is that? W3RV and I actually participate in Field Day, and actually make the scores we claim. The QSOs are real. Did you standardize operating stations? Why is it that comparing scores is only something that you can do? You can compare scores all you want. Do I dare? How many points did you make in last year's Field Day? Those weren't the score I was going to compare. Who is going to set up and pay for all those stations? What sort of stations would they be - HF, VHF, UHF? What sort of antennas, rigs, computers? Think about it. I did. That's why I'm asking the question. Do you think the taxpayers should subsidize amateur radio stations? Who sets up your field day station? Who pays for it? Depends on whether I'm operating solo, or as part of a group. Both? Either? The Morsemen Who are they? There used to be four of them... can bandy about the CQ WW and Field Day CW vs SSB contest scores all they want without having to standardize station equipment. I bring up a scenario and NOW station equipment must be standardized. Who said anything about standardizing station equipment? Not me. Yes, you. You! That's another untruth. Show where I said that - I don't think you can. This is what I said, including one typo: "So put all USA licensed amateurs in fron of a station equipped with a morse code key and with CWGet and total their scores." I said nothing about standardizing stations. YOU brought it up. I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come from. Where do stations come from now? Don't you know? Do you? You asked the question. Any ham who wants to operate Morse Code using CWGet or some other software can do so right now - if they have a station that includes rig, antenna, and computer. Yep. I can finally agree with something you said. So a version of the experiment you describe can happen in every contest. But it doesn't. Many, many, many amateur just aren't interested in morse code, and many, many, many amateurs just aren't interested in contests. Then your experiment won't happen. Of course it won't. It's hypothetical. But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... Offered by whom? Who would pay for those things and set them up? How would you get 100% participation? Why do you ask? Yet I don't know of any amateur radio contesters who operate that way. Do you? Nobody knew of anyone who operated amateur radio as in Larry Rolls "Only CW can save the situation" but I NEVER ONCE saw your objection to it. So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted here in *years*. Sure he has. He's posted as himself and he's probably posting as someone else. You mean "Slow Code"? That's probably WA8ULX. GrayJL? I bring up a scenario and NOW you have a problems with how contestors operate. Not at all. I just don't see anyone using CWGet to operate a contest - even though they could. Heck *you* could. Why don't you? I don't enjoy morse code. Then what is your point? Put a morse code key and a copy of CWGet in front of every USA licensed amateur, turn them loose in a CW contests, and total their scores. A simple, real-world challenge. What's the problem? The problem is that there isn't 100% participation in field day. So? It fails to meet the requirements of my scenario. It's not about *your* impossible scenario. You allowed Roll/K3LT an impossible scenario... The requirements for US amateur radio license have been slowly but steadily reduced for more than 25 years now. Just 25 years? I wrote "more than 25 years". I guess you forgot about the "Conditional" license where hams get an upgrade from their buddy. What does that mean? Besides, the Conditional stopped being issued about 30 years ago. Yep, but nobody ever claimed that amateur radio was being dumbed down. The USA amateur service has a proud history of it. How was it "dumbing down" to eliminate the Conditional? Jeez you're thick. No, Brian, I'm not "thick". You just did a poor job of explaining. No, you vectored off when it was clear that the creation of the Conditional Class license using the "buddy-system" of testing was the original dumbing down of the ARS. Another untruth by you. You vectored off. Why was the creation of the Conditional a "dumbing down"? It had the same test requirements as General. It wasn't performed in front of a steely-eyed FCC examiner after a 9 hour drive uphill both ways. It was dumbing down to create such a license class. Why? The Conditional and its predecessor Class C go back to before the FCC. So there's a long, long tradition in the dumbing down of the amateur radio service. Why was it a "dumbing down"? It was a change that allowed people who were unwilling to put forth an effort to join the amateur service. Smaller effort means they won't value their license and start misbehaving. It's an extension of the riff-raff argument. Not just the code tests but also the writtens. That's not the fault of those taking the tests. No, of course not. It's not anyones fault except the FCC that they put offices so far away from ham's residences. ?? The reason FCC stopped doing testing was to save money. It doesn't cost the FCC anything for an amateur to show up for testing, unless you want to claim that the examinees got to file a voucher for their travel. Actually it cost FCC a lot of money to do testing. It was the travel distance that was key in the creation of the Conditional license, not the desire for the FCC to save money. I was writing about the reason the FCC stopped doing license testing for *all* license classes. That's part of the reduction in requirements. Then you strayed off the subject. Another untruth. OK, I'll let you slide this once. Don't let anyone tell you that I'm not a nice guy. Try to stay on the subject. I am on the subject. You're trying to change it. If you choose to comment on somthing I say, then confine it to what I said. Why? You're not the moderator. Besides, you don't confine your comments to what someone else said. Why should others confine their comments to what you said? Look, you come on here and try to change the parameters of my "impossible" scenario, you want to tell me all about something I'm not discussing, then you tell my I'm making stuff up and telling untruths. I don't appreciate it. If you can't behave, you'll just have to put me in your killfile. If you stick with that simple concept, you'll do OK. First off, they had to have offices with test facilities. The office they had in Philadelphia back when I took my exams was on the 10th floor of the Custom House at 2nd and Chestnut. Lots of square feet of prime real estate just for the exam room. Then there was the time of the examiners, all of whom worked for FCC. Pay and benefits. At least two people per office, three days a week. Times the number of offices all over the country. Then add the FCC folks who revised the exams, duplicated them, and distributed them to the various offices all over the country. And the cost of doing all that. The VE system eliminated all that expense. All FCC has to do now wrt amateur license testing is to look over the QPC submissions and approve them. And occasionally retest somebody. That's all wunnerful, but you vectored off of the subject. Nope. Maybe next time you'll be able to cut and paste something germane to the subject. The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving over the testing to VEs. Nope. I twas the creation of the Conditional License. Why was that a "dumbing down"? It produced a reduction in effort, i.e., dumbing down. Eliminating Element 1 will not save the FCC any expense. Keeping it will not cost them anything, either. Maybe that's why it's taking them so long. Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in the rules for the last 3 R&Os. Why should they? Is there any doubt? There appears to be. The ARRL VEC and other VECs are giving el 1 exams at 13-15WPM when Part 97 says 5WPM. The Morse Code test consists of 5 minutes of Morse Code. How many words are in those tests? At 5 wpm, there would be 25 At 13 wpm, there would be 65 At 15 wpm, there would be 75 (A word is 5 characters) Not all words are 5 characters, unless your working with random groups of five. Yet they tell you that the exam myst be 5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means. It's not a problem to anyone with common sense. It appears to be a violation of Part 97. Only to someone without common sense. What would you say about someone who intentionally trips over a typo? They replaced their paid examiners with unpaid volunteers. Good thing there wasn't a union. Why? Are you anti-union? No. Are you? Do you favor scabs? Bandages are better. It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't use any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed. I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it.. Brian, do you think that using a false sexist claim is somehow going to cause you to win the debate? No false sexist claim. It's a sexist claim to assume that Dee's husband takes care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of her station Why? She said she hardly, if ever, used it. Somebody's got to be doing it? You're presuming she's not doing what needs to be done, and is dependent on someone else to deal with the theory. I don't think that's the case at all. If I considered your opinion to be wrong, do I get to call you a liar? Why would you do that? Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar? You're making that up, right? I'm asking a question. Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar? You're making that up, right? W3RV uses his sister to put up antennas for him these days. That's an untruth. How can you be sure? Where do you get that idea? Hmmm? I've put up antennas with W3RV. Or rather, I helped out a little, since he had it all worked out on his own. No sisters involved. He does know quite a lot about antennas, particularly the practical side. He even knows that a quarter wave at 73 MHz is a lot longer than three and one quarter inches.... Prolly for illegal operation. He has no authorization in that area. Actually, he does. Part 95 remote control, same as your buddy Len. And everybody else. Part 95 requires no authorization, so he doesn't. Incorrect. Part 95 authorizes everyone, as long as they meet the requirements. 99.9% of everyone don't know the requirements. How are they authorized? And knowing his background, he'd probably violate the Part 95 rules. Why? He got his start in amateur radio OPERATION without a license. |
I wish RadioGuy would stop humping my leg.
RadioGuy is like a little hyperactive poodle. He runs around, barks, maybe nips at your heels but not much because he scared of his shadow and he craps everywhere, but he's basically harmless and answers to Papa Dog. I just wish he'd stop humping my leg. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
"Dr.Ace" wrote in
: "One Hung Low" wrote in message . net... Would you care to share that with the rest of us? C'mon, spill the beans. We're dying to know if "slow" even has a license. :-) The Magic 8 Ball say's "No Way" . Ace - WH2T 8-Ball, is that what you use on CB? SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Dipschitt trips all over a typo and can't punctuate his way out of a wet paper bag. Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT. They must be very, very clever. Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own typographical errors...forever and ever... :-) I'll point out his punctuation errors a few times and let it go. What Heil is never going to forget is working out of band Frenchmen on 6 Meters. Perhaps when he passes, I start an amateur club memorializes his DX expertise and Operating prowess. It may not be in the same League as the Barry Goldwater station, but it'll be a start. Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered as direct combat military branches by draftees worried silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is. Has Jim approved your use of 1973 as the end of the war, or was he still tucking tail as late as 1975? Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining communications 24/7. Military personnel placement types MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they have for a communications specialty. Mmmmm. I would worry about someone not receiving standardized training. Could you ever be sure they were getting the job done unsupervised? When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-) Yeh, I was trained in meteorology which was in the "General" category, my worst area. Somehow I managed dinstinguished grad in both the 3 level and mandatory 7 level schools. Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on, but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-) Army needs... What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-) Other than being in country, Heil has made no claims of direct action or heroism. No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing) from their original form. The official archives in St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has them for proof by anyone with access. I'm good with what Heil has presented. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-) Naw. He's playing tag with Mark. Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as a civilian. I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T" receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG). There were a handful of billets that were DDA. Most of the unskilled work was handled by folks getting kicked out for various non-adaptability issues. The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of the Army in the later 1940s). "Getting the message through" at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a HOBBY. I got to visit SAC's "Giant Talk" at Elkhorn, NE. That was so cool. And the Navy broadcast stations on Guam. I used to receive their wx rtty and fax transmissions when in the field with the 2nd ID/ROK. Fun stuff. Later I had to rely on wx rtty only from Diego Garcia, and WEFAX from the orbiters in Somalia. There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale) folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television) Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even "fight" for ratings. It is show biz. Yeh, I watched them once or twice in the ROK, probably once during each tour. I did listen to the radio, and enjoyed the "shadow" and other old-tyme boradcast stuff they would put on autopilot overnight (worked a lot and worked a lot of night shifts). MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS. It was never essential to military communications despite the civilian hoopla attached to it. Yeh, when I was a war planner, I used to hit up the message center every morning about 6:30 AM, visit the control center, get an update on wx data flowing from our deployed locations, problems, etc. I'd brief the Colonel when he got in on the contingency locations, we'd go take the wx briefing, then head into the CINCs briefing. MARS had nothing to do with any comm we used. From the 1990s onward, MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US government...and doing good at that...using military MARS personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use phone patches to talk direct to family and friends. Or have some creep eavesdrop on husband/wife talk. But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what Heil actually did. He hasn't described it in anything but vague generalities and intimations of work performed. I don't even know if it was fixed or tactical, but that's alright. To use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one hostile action" action. :-) Coulda been. Don't know. He served and isn't claiming to be a hero. Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts." Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio. [he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ] The smugness is a bit hard to take. Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE." Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code." He needed an opening to show that he knows more than just amateur radio and guitar. Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Very much so! :-) A few billion bucks here, a few billion bucks there...might even add up to real money! (paraphrasing Yogi Berra) [thanks to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for all their many chartitable contributions worldwide!] I just don't think Bill Gates (or Paul Allen) much give a **** for morse "code." :-) I think I'll send Bill an email and invite him to become an amateur. I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't "morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of a million "words per second." [based on the average number of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman that can come close to that. :-) I'm surprised that Jim doesn't try to force Bill Gates to use morse code as a programming language. Hell, it's digital, right??? My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that 1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50 KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the 3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box] But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use. Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief... 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. It will all be over with soon. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT. "Minutiae", Len. Do the terms "Mother Superior" or "Waffen SS Guy" hold any meaning for you? Do you believe them to be attempts at personal humiliation? Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own typographical errors...forever and ever... :-) Oh, I'll make an occasional typo, Len. When you misuse the same term repeatedly, that isn't a typo. You do that often. Now if I were to make frequent *factual errors*, we'd be in the same boat. Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered as direct combat military branches by draftees worried silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is. I wasn't a draftee, Len. Nobody in the Air Force was a draftee. Nobody in the Navy was a draftee. I enlisted for four years. The minimum Navy hitch was for three. Draftees were non-volunteers who served two years. Now what? Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining communications 24/7. Oddly enough, I was not in the "amateur radio contesting" AFSC, yet my contesting skills were exactly the same skills I used in my Air Force duties. Military personnel placement types MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they have for a communications specialty. Oh, they MIGHT, huh? I suppose those bypassed specialist exam scores had nothing whatever to do with it. When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-) That's you. Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on, but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-) ....but you went through schooling. I was actually working within two days of my arrival at my first assignment. That was about seven-and-a-half weeks after I first entered the Air Force. What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-) Altered version, Leonard? What has been altered? Couple that with what military personnel folks MIGHT do and you may have stumbled upon something big. Have a talk with your new pal at your local recruiting office or better yet, have Brian Burke contact those "Stolen Valor" folks. No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing) from their original form. The official archives in St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has them for proof by anyone with access. Have you found people who are interested in seeing your proof, Len? I'm not offering you any proof. I have no intention of providing you digitized anything. Now what? Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-) Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as a civilian. That's great, Len. I'm sure that has provided you countless hours of pleasant memories. I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T" receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG). See, Leonard, you don't know everything after all. You're about to hose it up in your typical fashion though. I never said that I never received any specialty training after basic training. I wrote that I never attended any military technical school. The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of the Army in the later 1940s). That's all irrelevant, Len. Rest easy, old soldier. The Air Force's long tradition was maintained. "Getting the message through" at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a HOBBY. I'm certain that you'll be upset to learn that the message didn't always get through at any time of the day or night, watchword or no. There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale) folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television) Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even "fight" for ratings. It is show biz. That's very interesting, Len. I had nothing to do with AFRS or AFRTS. MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS. No, Len, it isn't. MARS never was show biz. I never had a MARS assignment. I've advised you of that a number of times. It was never essential to military communications despite the civilian hoopla attached to it. From the 1990s onward, MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US government...and doing good at that...using military MARS personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use phone patches to talk direct to family and friends. That's quite interesting, Len. But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what Heil actually did. No, you don't actually know what I did. He hasn't described it in anything but vague generalities and intimations of work performed. No, I haven't described it in detail. To use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one hostile action" action. :-) That'd be one more hostile action than you've experienced in the military, Len. :-) :-) :-) Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts." I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with few facts. Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio. My personal history runs 57 years, Leonard. That you know little of it is of little importance to me. [he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ] Is this where you "resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae [sic] that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT"? Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE." Huh? So what Brian really meant is COMPUTER code and that's what you mean too? Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code." Did Brian write "code" or not? I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't "morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of a million "words per second." [based on the average number of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman that can come close to that. :-) Great, Len. Stick with it. Enjoy your niche. :-) :-) My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that 1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50 KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the 3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box] Fascinating, but totally irrelevant, Len. But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use. Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief... "We must all" accept? Just how are you involved in amateur radio, Len? You needn't accept anything. Just stay on the sidelines and snipe as you've done for the past decade. 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. I didn't think you were *that* old, Leonard. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 5:52 pm wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Ooops. Without inserting the word "TEST" in "Code-free" will automatically alert Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis to run off again with his "helpful correction of mistakes." :-) Let's face fact: Brian was incorrect in his statement. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Tsk, Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis will HAVE to "reply" with his "helpful correction of mistakes" a la the mighty macho morseman style of "knowing what is best for amateur radio" (as He sees it...). Jim has been a licensed radio amateur for decades. I'd accept his view on how best to regulate amateur radio before I'd accept the word of someone who had never obtained any class amateur radio license. Now what? Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. True enough...and the OTHER half had to take a morse code TEST to get that AMATEUR license. Repeating his false statement doesn't make Brian's claim true. Your "true enough" doesn't make it true. Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. True enough. They don't have ONE consideration that I saw my error and posted my own correction of it. On every 'QWERTY' keyboard there is one key with an (unshifted) apostrophe and a (shifted) double-quote. Really, Len? Do you know why we have the QWERTY keyboard? In the shorthand version of dimensioning, a foot is denoted by the suffix of an apostrophe while an inch is denoted by the suffix of double quote. As an example, my height can be written 5' 10" or, in longer form, five feet ten inches. In rapid typing (I learned touch-typing in middle school) it is possible to make a mistake in too much pressure on the Shift key and inadvertently type in the double-quote. You must have missed a few lessons during that touch-typing course. You aren't supposed to rest your fingers on any of the keys. Your John Kerry explanation doesn't wash. To type an apostrophe, your finger shouldn't have been on the shift key at all. But...in the Grand Inquisitor manner of the might macho morsemen, a type by an NCTA is a CAPITAL OFFENSE... No, Len, it was simply another error. ...punishable by a lifetime of message comments about that typo...and NEVER acknowledging that it was corrected! When you resort to a preposterous excuse for making a typo--one that is absurd to anyone who knows anything about touch-typing--you'll likely hear more about your error the more you try to explain it. Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! HAR!!! :-) [Heil went to 'Ding Dong School'? :-)] Sure, I did, Len. I'm the right age. Miss Frances was a favorite of mine. Now what? Dave K8MN |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message oups.com... [snip] But if we were able to have have 100% participation and every amateur were offered a manual morse code key and a downloaded copy of CWGet.... The people who know Morse code would probably turn it down as they would not want to operate a contest handicapped by using CWGet. Dee, N8UZE |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 5:52 pm wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Ooops. Without inserting the word "TEST" in "Code-free" will automatically alert Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis to run off again with his "helpful correction of mistakes." :-) Let's face fact: Brian was incorrect in his statement. Brian was correct, and remains correct. Correct, correct, correct. When a Novice renews his/her license, it is as a Novice. When an Advanced renews his/her license, it is as an Advanced. But when a Technician Plus renews his/her license, it is as a Technician, NO PLUS. Should a Technician want to exercise privileges previously available to the PLUS, they must produce documentation granting those priveleges. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Tsk, Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis will HAVE to "reply" with his "helpful correction of mistakes" a la the mighty macho morseman style of "knowing what is best for amateur radio" (as He sees it...). Jim has been a licensed radio amateur for decades. I'd accept his view on how best to regulate amateur radio before I'd accept the word of someone who had never obtained any class amateur radio license. Now what? Your ignorance knows no bounds. You're already accepting the "word" of someone who never obtained any class of radio license... the regulators at the FCC. Get over it. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. True enough...and the OTHER half had to take a morse code TEST to get that AMATEUR license. Repeating his false statement doesn't make Brian's claim true. Your "true enough" doesn't make it true. Correct. It is true regardless of your's or Len's comments. That's the beauty about a truth. Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. True enough. They don't have ONE consideration that I saw my error and posted my own correction of it. On every 'QWERTY' keyboard there is one key with an (unshifted) apostrophe and a (shifted) double-quote. Really, Len? Do you know why we have the QWERTY keyboard? To slow down the Morse Operators!!! In the shorthand version of dimensioning, a foot is denoted by the suffix of an apostrophe while an inch is denoted by the suffix of double quote. As an example, my height can be written 5' 10" or, in longer form, five feet ten inches. In rapid typing (I learned touch-typing in middle school) it is possible to make a mistake in too much pressure on the Shift key and inadvertently type in the double-quote. You must have missed a few lessons during that touch-typing course. You aren't supposed to rest your fingers on any of the keys. Your John Kerry explanation doesn't wash. To type an apostrophe, your finger shouldn't have been on the shift key at all. They why has the QWERTY God placed a nub on each key where your index fingers are supposed to rest? But...in the Grand Inquisitor manner of the might macho morsemen, a type by an NCTA is a CAPITAL OFFENSE... No, Len, it was simply another error. No, Dave, it was a simple typo. ...punishable by a lifetime of message comments about that typo...and NEVER acknowledging that it was corrected! When you resort to a preposterous excuse for making a typo--one that is absurd to anyone who knows anything about touch-typing--you'll likely hear more about your error the more you try to explain it. I've operated TTY. I accept his answer. Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! HAR!!! :-) [Heil went to 'Ding Dong School'? :-)] Sure, I did, Len. I'm the right age. Miss Frances was a favorite of mine. Now what? Dave K8MN Now its back to 6M and those out of band Frenchmen. Best of Luck. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message oups.com... wrote: [snip] The Morse Code test consists of 5 minutes of Morse Code. How many words are in those tests? At 5 wpm, there would be 25 At 13 wpm, there would be 65 At 15 wpm, there would be 75 (A word is 5 characters) Not all words are 5 characters, unless your working with random groups of five. Granted not all words are five characters long. However, in order to develop the test, the "standard" word is defined as 5 characters even though word lengths may vary. This is then used to determine the character count in the test message. For 5 minutes of Morse Code: At 5wpm, the character count is 125 characters At 13wpm, the character count is 325 characters At 15wpm, the character count is 375 characters At 20wpm, the character count is 500 characters The number of characters, not words, copied is the basis on which the code tests are graded if one uses the 1 minute solid copy option to pass. This compensates for the fact that not all words are the same length. For the 5wpm test, that means only 25 characters in a row need to be correctly copied. While all alphabetic characters count as one each, punctuation and prosigns count as two each due to their length. Dee, N8UZE |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. The LAW? There is more than one variety of "Technician". Jim provided you fact. You've set out to distort it. You are a non-radio amateur with unchangeable ideas. I am an amateur radio operator and I know what I'm talking about. All former varieties of Technicians will be renewed as "Technician." Period. If the former varieties with HF privs wish to exercise those privs, THEY MUST PRODUCE DOCUMENTATION THAT IS NOT ON THEIR LICENSE AS RECEIVED FROM THE FCC. All Novices renew as Novices, All Advanced renew as Advanced, and all Tech Plusses renew as TECHNICIANS. Thems the facts. If you don't like it, complain to the FCC, not me. Maybe they'll change it for you to make me wrong and you right. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Mark in the Dark' wrote in
: On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 01:24:09 GMT, Slow Code wrote: "Dr.Ace" wrote in T: "One Hung Low" wrote in message . net... Would you care to share that with the rest of us? C'mon, spill the beans. We're dying to know if "slow" even has a license. :-) The Magic 8 Ball say's "No Way" . Ace - WH2T 8-Ball, is that what you use on CB? SC take a chill pill steve GO **** mark. Take a load off your mind. Maybe you'll feel like learning CW then. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. That's not true. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. That's not true. Technicians currently make up 43.7% of US amateurs (individuals who are currently licensed). 43.7% isn't "half". Not all of them are "code free" either. A considerable number are Technician Pluses who renewed as Technicians, upgraded Novices, and Technicians who passed Element 1. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. You either do not realize or refuse to admit your mistake. But you are still mistaken. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. . They are all Technicians now. That's not true. There are still over 34,000 Technican Pluses in the FCC database. The Technician Plus license is being phased out. That's not the same thing as doing away with the license class. And with over 34,000 current Technician Pluses in the FCC database, it is simply not true to say "They are all Technicians now". The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Now *that* is true - for the basic Technician license. A Technician who passes Element 1 gets some HF privileges. A Technician who was once a Novice or Tech Plus, or whose CSCE for Element 1 is new enough, can upgrade to General without additional Morse Code testing. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. That's true. can't seem to understand the LAW. That's not true. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' That's not true. The LAW? There is more than one variety of "Technician". Jim provided you fact. You've set out to distort it. You are a non-radio amateur with unchangeable ideas. I am an amateur radio operator That's true. and I know what I'm talking about. In this case, that's not true. At least, not completely. I'm an amateur radio operator, and I say you and Len are mistaken. All former varieties of Technicians will be renewed as "Technician." Period. That's true. However, they are not all the same. If the former varieties with HF privs wish to exercise those privs, THEY MUST PRODUCE DOCUMENTATION THAT IS NOT ON THEIR LICENSE AS RECEIVED FROM THE FCC. There's no reason to shout. All Novices renew as Novices, All Advanced renew as Advanced, and all Tech Plusses renew as TECHNICIANS. That's true. However, all Technicians are not "code free". Thems the facts. Not all of them. If you don't like it, complain to the FCC, not me. It's not about liking it. It's about the fact that the statement "Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license." is simply not accurate. You can shout and carry on, call names and get your buddy Len to do his thing, but the error of your statement will still exist, Brian. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Dipschitt trips all over a typo and can't punctuate his way out of a wet paper bag. Ah, but he "saved the day" at some small-time embassy when he used morse to "synchronize his RTTYs!" :-) Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT. They must be very, very clever. They ARE! They tell you so, right in here! Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own typographical errors...forever and ever... :-) I'll point out his punctuation errors a few times and let it go. What Heil is never going to forget is working out of band Frenchmen on 6 Meters. Perhaps when he passes, I start an amateur club memorializes his DX expertise and Operating prowess. It may not be in the same League as the Barry Goldwater station, but it'll be a start. Maybe you could get some space for it in France? Or even Algeria? :-) Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered as direct combat military branches by draftees worried silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is. Has Jim approved your use of 1973 as the end of the war, or was he still tucking tail as late as 1975? He might still be looking for the "correct" answer somewhere on the ARRL website... Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining communications 24/7. Military personnel placement types MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they have for a communications specialty. Mmmmm. I would worry about someone not receiving standardized training. Could you ever be sure they were getting the job done unsupervised? Not really. Outside of MARS I can't see any military comms facilities using ham gear. Maybe an old Hammarlund SP-600 civilian HF receiver that the military bought a lot of... When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-) Yeh, I was trained in meteorology which was in the "General" category, my worst area. Somehow I managed dinstinguished grad in both the 3 level and mandatory 7 level schools. "Level" terminology not understood. ? Good on that, though. From what I've seen of WX stations, it is NOT some high school science project stuff. :-) Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on, but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-) Army needs... Infantry, artillery, and armor are the "line" units involved with direct hostile action...in case some civilian wanted to know. They take the hits right off. Thing was, the Army thought ALL personnel were "soldiers first, specialists second." That's why we got to play sojer in da woods after our regular specialist duty hours. What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-) Other than being in country, Heil has made no claims of direct action or heroism. As far as I'm concerned, he was just another REMF who, years later, is playing everyone as if he were the big hero in "a country at war!" [those REMFs are spotted miles away...] No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing) from their original form. The official archives in St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has them for proof by anyone with access. I'm good with what Heil has presented. I'm not. He was "in" the USAF but that's all I will accept. That military time should have been good for his guvmint pension accumulation time, though...probably his whole plan for his future? Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-) Naw. He's playing tag with Mark. Whatever. :-) Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as a civilian. I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T" receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG). There were a handful of billets that were DDA. Most of the unskilled work was handled by folks getting kicked out for various non-adaptability issues. No doubt. Thing is, Heil could usually claim anydamnthing he wanted knowing that few in public venues of now would have been in the Air Force in Vietnam. Just like there are few amateurs who were in the State Department. Given that kind of an "audience," he can get away with all kinds of brags...and saying lots of generalities without going into specifics. The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of the Army in the later 1940s). "Getting the message through" at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a HOBBY. I got to visit SAC's "Giant Talk" at Elkhorn, NE. That was so cool. And the Navy broadcast stations on Guam. I used to receive their wx rtty and fax transmissions when in the field with the 2nd ID/ROK. Fun stuff. Later I had to rely on wx rtty only from Diego Garcia, and WEFAX from the orbiters in Somalia. Hmmm...more "glamorous" kinds of comms than I was involved in. :-) I would have liked to visit some of the old ACAN-DCS sites of the 1950s-1960s but most of those closed down or got very changed. Fort Deitrich in MD became a chem warfare center, no longer the central point of WAR (Washington Army Radio). The "Frisco" Army station was really more inland at Davis, CA, and has long been closed down. I understand the AFRS-VOA big station at Delano, CA, also went down. AFRTS used to have an adminstrative Hq only about a mile and a half from my house in Sun Valley, CA, but they moved that way east to an ex-USAF airfield; those buildings haven't been leased out to anyone else yet and its been like 8 years ago! [the dirt shadow of the old raised lettering of the building complex is still visible from La Tuna Canyon Boulevard] "My" old ADA site was taken over by USAF in 1963 and they ran it until 1978, then everything given back to Japanese. SAC ain't no more now and USAF has had a rather massive re- organization of units and mission roles. One thing good is that the old "oil burner routes" aren't there in civilian aviation notices...the old SAC practice runs on "targets" similar to USSR target locations. Be thankful that MAD worked! There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale) folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television) Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even "fight" for ratings. It is show biz. Yeh, I watched them once or twice in the ROK, probably once during each tour. I did listen to the radio, and enjoyed the "shadow" and other old-tyme boradcast stuff they would put on autopilot overnight (worked a lot and worked a lot of night shifts). The "T" wasn't stuffed into 'AFRS' until after 1960? Now there's an AFRTS station on each USN aircraft carrier! :-) AFRTS can download from various comm sats and rebroadcast now, if there still are some AFRTS terrestrial stations. Back in the 1950s AFRS depended a lot on HF relay from live USA broadcasts such as the baseball World Series. That would come in to Japan at about 2 AM the 'same day' get taped and then rebroadcast AS IF it were 'live' that afternoon. MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS. It was never essential to military communications despite the civilian hoopla attached to it. Yeh, when I was a war planner, I used to hit up the message center every morning about 6:30 AM, visit the control center, get an update on wx data flowing from our deployed locations, problems, etc. I'd brief the Colonel when he got in on the contingency locations, we'd go take the wx briefing, then head into the CINCs briefing. MARS had nothing to do with any comm we used. Same with me and ACAN-DCS. However, the Tokyo MARS station got 3rd priority level for 1 KW RTTY using the FEC HQ aircraft relay transmitter. Two-down and three-down NCOs at MARS used to try and "pull rank" on the night shifts at ADA to 'demand' time on it. :-) Kind of got to be fun for me when they did, I just read off the standing orders on useage priority, the ones signed by the light bird colonel who was then battalion commander. :-) After a couple years frustration the Tokyo MARS finally got their own teeny transmitter-receiver site at their billet...but with a nice new tribander beam. Regular message traffic was like thousands of TTYs per shift in the 1950s...running 24/7 of course. Kind of dull after the first few weeks on the job. Even in the big TTY relay room at Control (220 TTY tape units) We just made sure all the Txs were up and running, did the necessary QSYs, pulled maintenance when scheduled, checked the radio relay systems (landline backup) to make sure they worked if needed. On a rare month one Tx might go down of old age and we would do a frantic antenna connection changeover to bring up a spare Tx. Once a month the lowest-level contingency plan (a single 30 W AN/GRC-9 Tx-Rs left over from WW II would be tried from the transmitter site, manned by the only NCO there who could do morse. Each time the Rx would be so swamped by extraneous RF that the test net couldn't be heard. :-) From the 1990s onward, MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US government...and doing good at that...using military MARS personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use phone patches to talk direct to family and friends. Or have some creep eavesdrop on husband/wife talk. DSN is a LOT harder to intercept. Has to be done at DSN centers using their terminal equipment. But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what Heil actually did. He hasn't described it in anything but vague generalities and intimations of work performed. I don't even know if it was fixed or tactical, but that's alright. He implies it was something like "under fire" but that isn't the info I get from folks who worked HF comms there and not much is written up in the Army Center for Military History except NON-morse comms. To use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one hostile action" action. :-) Coulda been. Don't know. He served and isn't claiming to be a hero. He was in "a country at war!" :-) Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts." Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio. [he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ] The smugness is a bit hard to take. True. He sounds off like being Big and Important. :-) Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE." Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code." He needed an opening to show that he knows more than just amateur radio and guitar. Yeah, like he wouldn't know a NOP from a JMP instruction if it bit him in the rump. :-( Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Very much so! :-) A few billion bucks here, a few billion bucks there...might even add up to real money! (paraphrasing Yogi Berra) [thanks to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for all their many chartitable contributions worldwide!] I just don't think Bill Gates (or Paul Allen) much give a **** for morse "code." :-) I think I'll send Bill an email and invite him to become an amateur. Excellent! He could probably use a laugh. I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't "morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of a million "words per second." [based on the average number of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman that can come close to that. :-) I'm surprised that Jim doesn't try to force Bill Gates to use morse code as a programming language. Hell, it's digital, right??? Sheesh...the best Miccolis could do is crib the ENIAC museum PR stuff. :-) Gates could BUY an ENIAC out of petty cash funds. He could also buy out the whole ARRL if he desired; any corporation doing less than $15 million per annum in taxable income would be considered "very small" to him. My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that 1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50 KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the 3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box] But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use. Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief... 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. It will all be over with soon. I'm getting pessimistic. The Living Morse Museum of Amateur Radio on HF will continue too far into the future and the code test with it. Maybe long enough to Rescue the Earth and Mankind when alien beings from the stars invade us...'rescue' using morse code! :-( BTW, I still haven't heard of any amateur writing in here saving lives using morse code on the ham bands. Wonder why? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 5:52 pm wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Ooops. Without inserting the word "TEST" in "Code-free" will automatically alert Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis to run off again with his "helpful correction of mistakes." :-) Let's face fact: Brian was incorrect in his statement. Brian was correct, and remains correct. Correct, correct, correct. When a Novice renews his/her license, it is as a Novice. When an Advanced renews his/her license, it is as an Advanced. But when a Technician Plus renews his/her license, it is as a Technician, NO PLUS. Should a Technician want to exercise privileges previously available to the PLUS, they must produce documentation granting those priveleges. Brian, der Waffen SS guy doesn't KNOW that...he is secure in his extra super-special ignorance... The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Tsk, Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis will HAVE to "reply" with his "helpful correction of mistakes" a la the mighty macho morseman style of "knowing what is best for amateur radio" (as He sees it...). Jim has been a licensed radio amateur for decades. I'd accept his view on how best to regulate amateur radio before I'd accept the word of someone who had never obtained any class amateur radio license. Now what? Your ignorance knows no bounds. You're already accepting the "word" of someone who never obtained any class of radio license... the regulators at the FCC. Get over it. Tsk, he doesn't understand THAT either...he is SO dumb. The FCC giveth, the FCC taketh away. NONE of the staff or commissioners at the FCC are required to hold amateur radio licenses in order to REGULATE US amateur radio. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. True enough...and the OTHER half had to take a morse code TEST to get that AMATEUR license. Repeating his false statement doesn't make Brian's claim true. Your "true enough" doesn't make it true. Correct. It is true regardless of your's or Len's comments. That's the beauty about a truth. Heil NEEDS the morsemen's PCTA "truth." [Big Brother told him] Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. True enough. They don't have ONE consideration that I saw my error and posted my own correction of it. On every 'QWERTY' keyboard there is one key with an (unshifted) apostrophe and a (shifted) double-quote. Really, Len? Do you know why we have the QWERTY keyboard? To slow down the Morse Operators!!! Heil couldn't do 60 WPM on a morse key if his life depended on it. In the shorthand version of dimensioning, a foot is denoted by the suffix of an apostrophe while an inch is denoted by the suffix of double quote. As an example, my height can be written 5' 10" or, in longer form, five feet ten inches. In rapid typing (I learned touch-typing in middle school) it is possible to make a mistake in too much pressure on the Shift key and inadvertently type in the double-quote. You must have missed a few lessons during that touch-typing course. You aren't supposed to rest your fingers on any of the keys. Your John Kerry explanation doesn't wash. To type an apostrophe, your finger shouldn't have been on the shift key at all. They why has the QWERTY God placed a nub on each key where your index fingers are supposed to rest? Der Waffen SS guy worships another religion...the Church of St. Hiram. But...in the Grand Inquisitor manner of the might macho morsemen, a type by an NCTA is a CAPITAL OFFENSE... No, Len, it was simply another error. No, Dave, it was a simple typo. Tsk, that's why the Waffen SS guy is called that. He wants a summary firing squad for every NCTA that makes typos. ...punishable by a lifetime of message comments about that typo...and NEVER acknowledging that it was corrected! When you resort to a preposterous excuse for making a typo--one that is absurd to anyone who knows anything about touch-typing--you'll likely hear more about your error the more you try to explain it. I've operated TTY. I accept his answer. Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! HAR!!! :-) [Heil went to 'Ding Dong School'? :-)] Sure, I did, Len. I'm the right age. Miss Frances was a favorite of mine. Now what? Dave K8MN Now its back to 6M and those out of band Frenchmen. Best of Luck. Don't forget "downloading firmware" for his Orion. :-) Der Waffen SS guy ate too many Ding-Dongs. Now HE is a "chime against" ham humanity... |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 5:52 pm wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 4:17 am wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: [ etc., etc., etc.... :-) ] Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free license. You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less than half. 40% is more like it. 49.5% according to your very own postings. You are mistaken, Brian. No, I'm not. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Ooops. Without inserting the word "TEST" in "Code-free" will automatically alert Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis to run off again with his "helpful correction of mistakes." :-) Let's face fact: Brian was incorrect in his statement. Brian was correct, and remains correct. Correct, correct, correct. When a Novice renews his/her license, it is as a Novice. When an Advanced renews his/her license, it is as an Advanced. But when a Technician Plus renews his/her license, it is as a Technician, NO PLUS. Should a Technician want to exercise privileges previously available to the PLUS, they must produce documentation granting those priveleges. Brian, der Waffen SS guy doesn't KNOW that... Sure he does. I just told it to him. he is secure in his extra super-special ignorance... He frets over stuff and argues a lot. The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested). The FCC did away with the Technician Plus class of license. They are all Technicians now. The Technician license has no requirement for a code exam. Should a Technician wish to use what were once Technician Plus priveleges, they're on their own to show eligibility. Miccolis can't seem to understand the LAW. No matter how often it is explained to him, he falls back on the Speroni 'definition' of 'What Technicians Are.' Of course, AH0A is a PCTA morseman of unchangeable ideas. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. Tsk, Mighty Macho Morseman Miccolis will HAVE to "reply" with his "helpful correction of mistakes" a la the mighty macho morseman style of "knowing what is best for amateur radio" (as He sees it...). Jim has been a licensed radio amateur for decades. I'd accept his view on how best to regulate amateur radio before I'd accept the word of someone who had never obtained any class amateur radio license. Now what? Your ignorance knows no bounds. You're already accepting the "word" of someone who never obtained any class of radio license... the regulators at the FCC. Get over it. Tsk, he doesn't understand THAT either...he is SO dumb. The FCC giveth, the FCC taketh away. NONE of the staff or commissioners at the FCC are required to hold amateur radio licenses in order to REGULATE US amateur radio. My personal opinion is that it's a conflict of interest for FCC staff to hold amateur radio licenses. Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free License. True enough...and the OTHER half had to take a morse code TEST to get that AMATEUR license. Repeating his false statement doesn't make Brian's claim true. Your "true enough" doesn't make it true. Correct. It is true regardless of your's or Len's comments. That's the beauty about a truth. Heil NEEDS the morsemen's PCTA "truth." [Big Brother told him] Yeh, I guess. I don't understand how a guy can work so hard to remain ignorant. Tsk. Miccolis is hell-bent on character-assassination lately. I make a typo in a message and he makes it into a HEADLINE STORY charging some kind of ineptitude! :-) It was obviously a typo. But Jim and Dave put on their stupid face allatime. True enough. They don't have ONE consideration that I saw my error and posted my own correction of it. On every 'QWERTY' keyboard there is one key with an (unshifted) apostrophe and a (shifted) double-quote. Really, Len? Do you know why we have the QWERTY keyboard? To slow down the Morse Operators!!! Heil couldn't do 60 WPM on a morse key if his life depended on it. Straight key? It's highly unlikely. Maybe with a keyboard and CWGet. In the shorthand version of dimensioning, a foot is denoted by the suffix of an apostrophe while an inch is denoted by the suffix of double quote. As an example, my height can be written 5' 10" or, in longer form, five feet ten inches. In rapid typing (I learned touch-typing in middle school) it is possible to make a mistake in too much pressure on the Shift key and inadvertently type in the double-quote. You must have missed a few lessons during that touch-typing course. You aren't supposed to rest your fingers on any of the keys. Your John Kerry explanation doesn't wash. To type an apostrophe, your finger shouldn't have been on the shift key at all. They why has the QWERTY God placed a nub on each key where your index fingers are supposed to rest? Der Waffen SS guy worships another religion...the Church of St. Hiram. False Gods.... But...in the Grand Inquisitor manner of the might macho morsemen, a type by an NCTA is a CAPITAL OFFENSE... No, Len, it was simply another error. No, Dave, it was a simple typo. Tsk, that's why the Waffen SS guy is called that. He wants a summary firing squad for every NCTA that makes typos. That's so sad. Anyone else can read past a typo and still ket the message. Dave trips over a typo and skins his knee key. ...punishable by a lifetime of message comments about that typo...and NEVER acknowledging that it was corrected! When you resort to a preposterous excuse for making a typo--one that is absurd to anyone who knows anything about touch-typing--you'll likely hear more about your error the more you try to explain it. I've operated TTY. I accept his answer. Not only that, his Waffen SS buddie has to chime in like it is a capital offense! :-) Tsk, Miccolis is now under Typo Alert Status, condition Red. Each and every typo HE makes will be FEATURED INEPTITUDES of his own! Regardless of his 'explanations' of his typos, he will be charged with violations of all mankind! :-) Chimes against humanity! HAR!!! :-) [Heil went to 'Ding Dong School'? :-)] Sure, I did, Len. I'm the right age. Miss Frances was a favorite of mine. Now what? Dave K8MN Now its back to 6M and those out of band Frenchmen. Best of Luck. Don't forget "downloading firmware" for his Orion. :-) Wonder how offen he has to do dat? Der Waffen SS guy ate too many Ding-Dongs. Now HE is a "chime against" ham humanity... Hamanity. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Dipschitt trips all over a typo and can't punctuate his way out of a wet paper bag. Ah, but he "saved the day" at some small-time embassy when he used morse to "synchronize his RTTYs!" :-) He said. Lacking any valid response, they resort to misdirective attempts at personal humiliation about minutae that have NO direct bearing on the SUBJECT. They must be very, very clever. They ARE! They tell you so, right in here! True enough, but I think they're wrong. Since Heil is bound and determined to find typos and misspellings, all we have to do is scrutinize HIS epic prose in here and make him wallow in his own typographical errors...forever and ever... :-) I'll point out his punctuation errors a few times and let it go. What Heil is never going to forget is working out of band Frenchmen on 6 Meters. Perhaps when he passes, I start an amateur club memorializes his DX expertise and Operating prowess. It may not be in the same League as the Barry Goldwater station, but it'll be a start. Maybe you could get some space for it in France? Or even Algeria? :-) Fr. Guyana? Our military isn't perfect. Many of those who enlist aren't all that sharp. Most are shoved into a career field in which they have no interest. Most aren't going to make the military a career. You must be remembering the draft years when, even though the Air Force didn't use the draft, the draft generated a significant interest in Air Force service. That and the USN. The USAF and USN weren't considered as direct combat military branches by draftees worried silly about harm to their precious bodies. Back in the Vietnam War era 33 to 50 years ago, that is. Has Jim approved your use of 1973 as the end of the war, or was he still tucking tail as late as 1975? He might still be looking for the "correct" answer somewhere on the ARRL website... I like 1973, no matter what Jim thinks or says. And until we get or MIA's and POW's all back, I think it's still an open matter. Some are lucky enough to have skills obtained prior to military service. Some of those are fortunate enough to serve in a field in which they have some expertise or interest. Some with grave disappointment that they couldn't be hams in particular combat zones. Funny thing, but the military doesn't consider amateur radio "contesting" as a useful skill in maintaining communications 24/7. Military personnel placement types MIGHT give such recruits a nod in the direction of some communications IF (and only IF) there is a directive they have for a communications specialty. Mmmmm. I would worry about someone not receiving standardized training. Could you ever be sure they were getting the job done unsupervised? Not really. Outside of MARS I can't see any military comms facilities using ham gear. Maybe an old Hammarlund SP-600 civilian HF receiver that the military bought a lot of... The military thrives on standardization. When I enlisted in the Army, I was assigned to Signal Corps and Signal Basic Training WITHOUT being a licensed amateur and hitting only the medium percentile in the morse code aptitude test! Sunnuvagun! :-) Yeh, I was trained in meteorology which was in the "General" category, my worst area. Somehow I managed dinstinguished grad in both the 3 level and mandatory 7 level schools. "Level" terminology not understood. ? 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 level 1 is a graduate of basic training. 9 is full performance level for a careerist. Good on that, though. From what I've seen of WX stations, it is NOT some high school science project stuff. :-) Military wx personnel are a lot more competent than what you're seing on television. I don't know where those guys come from although most of them have collitch degrees in meteorology. Our biggest challenge as Airmen and NCO's was to retrain LTs and Capts in standardized methods. Oh, yeah, in March 1952 there was a definite WAR going on, but in northeast Asia, not southeast Asia. The Army had definite needs for infantry, artillery, and armor personnel replacements but I was picked for signal. My only license then was an Illinois driver license. :-) Army needs... Infantry, artillery, and armor are the "line" units involved with direct hostile action...in case some civilian wanted to know. They take the hits right off. The only homegrown WX that the Army has are the ARTYMET guys. They run up PIBALs for wind speeds and directions for calculating trajectory. The rest of the weather on Army installations and deployed are USAF. That's how I ended up with 2ID. Thing was, the Army thought ALL personnel were "soldiers first, specialists second." That's why we got to play sojer in da woods after our regular specialist duty hours. You gotta believe me when I say that all us USAF guys were thrilled with USA assignments... I recall geting woke by the armory saying I had to come down and clean my dirty weapon. I was between 12 hour midshifts when the call came in, so I was lacking a sense of humor. I called them back and told them my weapon was clean, read me the weapon number. Yep, it was my weapon. So I put on my uniform and went down there. Gave em my weapon card, and they handed be a filthy rifle, not just powder residue, but sand and mud, too. I asked them not to hand out my weapon to anyone but me from now on. Probably a direct duty MOS. What we got there in Heil's (altered?) version of his personal biographic factoids is strangely similar to the undetailed, grandiose CLAIMS of the former "war hero of the USMC," Major Dud (Robeson). :-) Other than being in country, Heil has made no claims of direct action or heroism. As far as I'm concerned, he was just another REMF who, years later, is playing everyone as if he were the big hero in "a country at war!" [those REMFs are spotted miles away...] He may have been a REMF, but I don't know. No problem on proof for me. I've got my records and some of them are digitized (PDF for universality in viewing) from their original form. The official archives in St. Louis (NARA Military Personnel Records Center) has them for proof by anyone with access. I'm good with what Heil has presented. I'm not. He was "in" the USAF but that's all I will accept. That military time should have been good for his guvmint pension accumulation time, though...probably his whole plan for his future? Said he lives in a tar paper shack in WV. That doesn't sound like bragging, and it's something I can believe. FWIW, I think the state dept was merely a vehicle for dxpeditions, not a significant grab for a fat pension. Why aren't the communications billets merely a direct duty assignment after basic training? They can be. That's how I did it. I never set foot in an Air Force technical school. Of course I'd already been a radio amateur for seven years when I joined the military. I was awarded my 3-level right out of basic training. I went directed duty to Barksdale AFB after ten days of leave after Amarillo. Lackland. San Antonio. Yes, Lackland AFB is in San Antonio. Amarillo AFB was in Amarillo. That's where I went through basic training. Amarillo. Amarillo. I see. Wikipedia confirms Amarillo AFB as an inprocessing base. Did you catch what Robesin's got? I have no idea of what you mean, Brian. Stories about the military. Oh, my, here comes Major Dud Robeson the II. :-) Naw. He's playing tag with Mark. Whatever. :-) I think all of Marks out-assholing Robesin has finally paid off. Since 54 years ago I've been acquainted with (perhaps) hundreds of military personnel both as one myself and (much longer) as a civilian. I don't know of ANY military personnel who "DIDN'T" receive any specialty training after their Basic Training (or Boot Camp for USN and USMC and USCG). There were a handful of billets that were DDA. Most of the unskilled work was handled by folks getting kicked out for various non-adaptability issues. No doubt. Thing is, Heil could usually claim anydamnthing he wanted knowing that few in public venues of now would have been in the Air Force in Vietnam. Just like there are few amateurs who were in the State Department. Given that kind of an "audience," he can get away with all kinds of brags...and saying lots of generalities without going into specifics. My favorite is his brag about working out of band Frenchmen on 6M. What an idiot. The USAF signals people have a long tradition of keeping comms alive and well 24/7 just as the Army did it (USAF came out of the Army in the later 1940s). "Getting the message through" at any time of the day or night is the watchword for both USA and USAF signals. They don't do it the "amateur way" as a HOBBY. I got to visit SAC's "Giant Talk" at Elkhorn, NE. That was so cool. And the Navy broadcast stations on Guam. I used to receive their wx rtty and fax transmissions when in the field with the 2nd ID/ROK. Fun stuff. Later I had to rely on wx rtty only from Diego Garcia, and WEFAX from the orbiters in Somalia. Hmmm...more "glamorous" kinds of comms than I was involved in. :-) Constantly changing antenna lengths and orientation. We used a lot of Alden 9315TR and TRT's. And WEFAX or HRPT strip imagery. We did have a setup in a comm van for wx intercept that never really worked that well, and tons more expensive than the Aldens. Then we got a dedicated Tactical Automated Weather Distribution System (TAWDS) that had a bank of HF transceivers, modems, and a Nye Viking telegraph key. Nobody knew what the key was for. As I was leaving the service, Harris Corp in Melbourn was building us a tactical DMSP terminal. I made a fdew trips to Melbourne and Ft Gillem to review its progress. Funny thing, I think the great big DMSP vans were originally "tactical." I would have liked to visit some of the old ACAN-DCS sites of the 1950s-1960s but most of those closed down or got very changed. Fort Deitrich in MD became a chem warfare center, no longer the central point of WAR (Washington Army Radio). The "Frisco" Army station was really more inland at Davis, CA, and has long been closed down. I understand the AFRS-VOA big station at Delano, CA, also went down. AFRTS used to have an adminstrative Hq only about a mile and a half from my house in Sun Valley, CA, but they moved that way east to an ex-USAF airfield; those buildings haven't been leased out to anyone else yet and its been like 8 years ago! [the dirt shadow of the old raised lettering of the building complex is still visible from La Tuna Canyon Boulevard] "My" old ADA site was taken over by USAF in 1963 and they ran it until 1978, then everything given back to Japanese. I arrived in ROK in 1979, and the switch at Fuchu was in use for wx comms. SAC ain't no more now and USAF has had a rather massive re- organization of units and mission roles. Reorganization was the only way to manage the 50+% drawdown. By reorganizing the AF at the same time as the drawdown, it kept everyone confused. We didn't notice if we were screwed up because we were hemmoraging people, or if we were screwed up because the reorg plan was bad. Strategic Air Command is now called Strategic Command or StratCom for short. They lost almost all of their tankers to Military Airlift Command/MAC, renamed Air Mobility Command/AMC. Tactical Air Command /TAC was renamed Air Combat Command/ACC. I guess they put all their thought into the new name for ACC. One thing good is that the old "oil burner routes" aren't there in civilian aviation notices...the old SAC practice runs on "targets" similar to USSR target locations. Be thankful that MAD worked! Almost nobody alive today knows about that. There IS an exception: AFRS and (later) AFRTS. A Special Services branch...entertainment (and, supposedly morale) folks in uniform. Armed Forces Radio (and Television) Service doesn't operate from combat zones, doesn't even "fight" for ratings. It is show biz. Yeh, I watched them once or twice in the ROK, probably once during each tour. I did listen to the radio, and enjoyed the "shadow" and other old-tyme boradcast stuff they would put on autopilot overnight (worked a lot and worked a lot of night shifts). The "T" wasn't stuffed into 'AFRS' until after 1960? Now there's an AFRTS station on each USN aircraft carrier! :-) They've got University of Maryland instructors on board, too. AFRTS can download from various comm sats and rebroadcast now, if there still are some AFRTS terrestrial stations. Back in the 1950s AFRS depended a lot on HF relay from live USA broadcasts such as the baseball World Series. That would come in to Japan at about 2 AM the 'same day' get taped and then rebroadcast AS IF it were 'live' that afternoon. Yep, same deal with TV in the Pacific. I heard people complain that if they read the Stars and Stripes, it would ruin the outcome of the game that we be televised about a week after the fact. MARS might be in the same category as AFRS-AFRTS. It was never essential to military communications despite the civilian hoopla attached to it. Yeh, when I was a war planner, I used to hit up the message center every morning about 6:30 AM, visit the control center, get an update on wx data flowing from our deployed locations, problems, etc. I'd brief the Colonel when he got in on the contingency locations, we'd go take the wx briefing, then head into the CINCs briefing. MARS had nothing to do with any comm we used. Same with me and ACAN-DCS. However, the Tokyo MARS station got 3rd priority level for 1 KW RTTY using the FEC HQ aircraft relay transmitter. Two-down and three-down NCOs at MARS used to try and "pull rank" on the night shifts at ADA to 'demand' time on it. :-) Kind of got to be fun for me when they did, I just read off the standing orders on useage priority, the ones signed by the light bird colonel who was then battalion commander. :-) After a couple years frustration the Tokyo MARS finally got their own teeny transmitter-receiver site at their billet...but with a nice new tribander beam. Regular message traffic was like thousands of TTYs per shift in the 1950s...running 24/7 of course. Kind of dull after the first few weeks on the job. Even in the big TTY relay room at Control (220 TTY tape units) We just made sure all the Txs were up and running, did the necessary QSYs, pulled maintenance when scheduled, checked the radio relay systems (landline backup) to make sure they worked if needed. On a rare month one Tx might go down of old age and we would do a frantic antenna connection changeover to bring up a spare Tx. Once a month the lowest-level contingency plan (a single 30 W AN/GRC-9 Tx-Rs left over from WW II would be tried from the transmitter site, manned by the only NCO there who could do morse. Each time the Rx would be so swamped by extraneous RF that the test net couldn't be heard. :-) From the 1990s onward, MARS has taken on a communications role for most of the US government...and doing good at that...using military MARS personnel. With DSN connection to the Internet, the "boys overseas" don't need to wait for surface mail or use phone patches to talk direct to family and friends. Or have some creep eavesdrop on husband/wife talk. DSN is a LOT harder to intercept. Has to be done at DSN centers using their terminal equipment. But...in Heil's case WE don't really know in DETAIL what Heil actually did. He hasn't described it in anything but vague generalities and intimations of work performed. I don't even know if it was fixed or tactical, but that's alright. He implies it was something like "under fire" but that isn't the info I get from folks who worked HF comms there and not much is written up in the Army Center for Military History except NON-morse comms. To use Major Dud Robeson's "description" Heil was "in one hostile action" action. :-) Coulda been. Don't know. He served and isn't claiming to be a hero. He was in "a country at war!" :-) I'm in a "country at war." Heil sounds off real big, smug and arrogant with "facts." Thing is, he just doesn't apply those facts factually to his own (33 to 40 year prior personal history) other than the usual claims of having "expertise" in amateur radio. [he sounds like a verbose Blowcode in drag... :-) ] The smugness is a bit hard to take. True. He sounds off like being Big and Important. :-) Sounds to me more like frustrated and little. Whole government agencies gave up on code. Commercial businesses gave up on code. Oracle uses a lot of code. Heil put on his stupid face again. :-( The "code" referred to by you, by me, is COMPUTER (Instruction) "CODE." Sigh...more MISDIRECTION into the general "code." He needed an opening to show that he knows more than just amateur radio and guitar. Yeah, like he wouldn't know a NOP from a JMP instruction if it bit him in the rump. :-( Oracle is a business which didn't give up on code. Bill Gates has an answer for your Oracle. Very much so! :-) A few billion bucks here, a few billion bucks there...might even add up to real money! (paraphrasing Yogi Berra) [thanks to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for all their many chartitable contributions worldwide!] I just don't think Bill Gates (or Paul Allen) much give a **** for morse "code." :-) I think I'll send Bill an email and invite him to become an amateur. Excellent! He could probably use a laugh. Who knows, he just might send a buck or two to the frequency defense fund. I know and use a few high-level COMPUTER codes. I know and use a few Assembler-level COMPUTER codes. Those just ain't "morse code." :-) My little Apple ][+ can do a third of a million "words per second." [based on the average number of clock cycles per byte-word instruction Ain't NO morseman that can come close to that. :-) I'm surprised that Jim doesn't try to force Bill Gates to use morse code as a programming language. Hell, it's digital, right??? Sheesh...the best Miccolis could do is crib the ENIAC museum PR stuff. :-) Gates could BUY an ENIAC out of petty cash funds. He could also buy out the whole ARRL if he desired; any corporation doing less than $15 million per annum in taxable income would be considered "very small" to him. Church of Saint Bill Gates... has a certain ring to esn't it? My current computer box is one helluva lot FASTER than that 1980-era Apple ][+ and goes faster per second with 32-bit words. My dial-up connection to the Internet (usually 50 KBPS) does about 50,000 "words per minute" just with the 3 KHz bandwidth telephone line. The new set-top cable TV box we just had installed this morning (has a DVR built-in plus more cable service channels, all on digital) has an incredibly high data rate. [our Samsung 27 inch DTV accepts DTV direct from the new digital service set-top box] But...we must all "respect and honor" the mighty morse expertise of the PCTA amateur extras because they think they typify the "state of the art" in communications mode use. Greater than 20 "words per minute!" Good grief... 1906 thinking in the year 2006. Ptui. It will all be over with soon. I'm getting pessimistic. The Living Morse Museum of Amateur Radio on HF will continue too far into the future and the code test with it. Maybe long enough to Rescue the Earth and Mankind when alien beings from the stars invade us...'rescue' using morse code! :-( BTW, I still haven't heard of any amateur writing in here saving lives using morse code on the ham bands. Wonder why? The Society for Creative Radio Anachronism might have a gig on it. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
wrote: wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Oct 31 2006 6:07 pm Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message wrote: Must you put on your stupid face? Can't you take a typo? Brian, it's the usual PCTA "answer" in debate. :-) Dipschitt trips all over a typo and can't punctuate his way out of a wet paper bag. Ah, but he "saved the day" at some small-time embassy when he used morse to "synchronize his RTTYs!" :-) He said. Sorry, Brian, your statement is as false as Len's. I *didn't* write any such thing. Len purports to quote me. I've not written that I "saved the day" or did I write "syncronize his RTTY's". Now we have Len falsely claiming something and you backing him up. It looks as if the Old Organ Grinder and his red-hatted monkey are back in business. Dave K8MN |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:39 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com