"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
. ..

I'd say we will get more Generals, including some who are new hams, and a
few new Techs. There are definitely some Techs who are no longer active
due
to cellphones, but as long as they remain licenced it doesn't affect the
question.

There is definitely a problem in that you can no longer get test manuals
in
Radio Shack, or in any other store AFAIK. I tried to buy a General book
for
my XYL yesterday, but couldn't.

My vote is 2-6% increase.

73 de N3KIP

I've added your guess to the list.

I hope that your prediction is correct. But since the non-hams I have
talked to about ham radio don't know what the requirements for a license
are, they are not apt to jump into ham radio because the code test was
dropped. Most of them glaze over at the mention of a license and we never
even get to the requirements.

I expect that most of the active Techs will upgrade to General or even
Extra. Beyond that, I don't expect to see much change.

Over the long haul, I don't expect much change. Compared to other
countries, we actually have a fairly high percentage of people who have ham
licenses. Other than Japan, most countries have around 0.1% (or less) of
their population licensed. We have about 0.2% which puts us very high on
the list. I would expect our ham population numbers to stabilize but
wouldn't make any guesses as to what that number will be.

I'd really like to use a longer baseline for this pool but I don't think
very many of us are really up for a 5 or 10 year pool.

Dee, N8UZE

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]


There is definitely a problem in that you can no longer get test manuals
in
Radio Shack, or in any other store AFAIK. I tried to buy a General book
for
my XYL yesterday, but couldn't.


I think this symptomatic of the real issue. Our field don't get enough
exposure to the general public and materials on it are hard to come by
unless you already know that ham radio exists and you use the internet to
find study materials.

Dee, N8UZE

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

I submit that many entered the "Big Leagues of HF Radio" about the same
time as you. You are but one of them.

You betcha, but, as far as I can find, the ONLY one who
posted a photo essay (20 pages worth) about it on the
Internet. See:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...y/My3Years.pdf

So, how do you feel that a station with 40+ transmitters
all at 1 KW MINIMUM RF output on HF is "NOT Big Time?"
How do you feel over 200,000 messages per month sent is
"NOT Big Time?" How do you feel that a Signal Battalion
directly attached to an area headquarters is "NOT Big
Time?" Kiss my yes.

Wow, you think being IN the Department of State comms "IS"
a bigger time? Of course you do. ANYTHING you do is
(in your words here) bigger and better than what anyone
else in here has done, ever...

You are the only one of them
comparing learning the Morse Code to an "AUTISTIC TALENT".

Sorry, sweetums, but I'm the SECOND one intimating that
the "talent" is so. Have you forgetten the words of "John
Smith" (another Angeleno) so quickly? Of course you will.
You ALWAYS try to "blame" someone else as "being in error"
whenever they disagree with you.

As with so many other things you've written here, you are in error.

Hey, Davie boy, in the immortal words of the ByteBrothers,
* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

Typing in
capital letters and adding a "Tsk, tsk" here and there don't make your
views true.

Being the archtypical Prussian pedantic literalist who
only "obeys orders" of directives from the ARRL does NOT
make YOU "true," sweetie.

You are one HUMORLESS buzzard whose skin is SO thin that
it rivals the shaving thickness from a microtome output.


Leonard, I have little doubt that once all of the smoke clears away,
you'll still be attempting to open the box containing your Extra Class
amateur radio license.

So, other than you and Jimmie Noserve, who gives a ****?

I got my PROFESSIONAL radio operator license in 1956 and
used it. I got my (no test whatsoever) CB license in
1959 and used it. I got my COMMERCIAL PLMRS station
license in the 80s (as co-owner but responsible for
technical operation) and used it.

Are you going to say that an AMATEUR radio license is
"more Big Time" than what I've gotten already? That I
MUST have a ham license from the FCC to prove my strength,
force, agility, and intelligence MORE than a whole career
IN the radio-electronics industry?!?

Of course you do! Anyone who has done less than you is
always the lesser in your comments.

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !


If you want to wave a metaphor, make certain that it is a valid one.

Oh! YOU are the Guardian of English as she are wrote?

Of course you are! You ALWAYS "correct" others' "mistakes"
since they are always lesser than YOU.

Tsk, you should be writing in Hunnish...of which you claimed
to be a Master once in another of your petulant, ****ed-off
rants at me. :-)

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !


Finally, CW is consigned to the trash
heap with sword swallowing--CW, a skill whose time has come, and gone ...

Sorry, "John", Morse Code is not being consigned to any trash heap. It
is used daily in making thousands of contacts by radio amateurs.

Really? I thought RADIOS were needed first...?

Your juvenile behavior is showing, Leonard.

Tsk, tsk, the pedantic Prussian literalist, in his smug
arrogance, cannot recognize SARCASM?

You mean that ALL one needs is closing and opening a circuit
in the proper morse manner? Wow! What a mode!

If that's what you come away with after reading a sentence which
includes the words "by radio amateurs", so be it.

Poor baby, unable to recognize SARCASM and you start in on
another fabricated finger-pointing? "Bad form, old man."

Tell us what OTHER radio services still use morse code for
communications. [that should be easy...there ain't none]

It is then peculiar that I'm still hearing aviation beacons which use
Morse Code.

What, the old pre-WW2 "A-N" beacons on LF? Good grief,
Snoopy, those aren't being used by Real pilots these days.

If you mean VOR or ILS with the periodic morse code tone
identifier, those ARE being used in civil aviation. But,
the VOR isn't called a "beacon" and the ILS certainly isn't
one of those. The 75 MHz marker beacons are "beacons" but
they do NOT have any morse identifier, just a constant AM
tone denoting Outer, Middle, or Inner beacon.

Your AMATEUR license does NOT authorize you to transmit in
the Aviation Radio Services.

I hear utility stations in the HF bands using Morse Code
for two way communication.

Then feel free to listen to those "utility stations" and
enjoy what they have to say, if anything comprehensible to
you. Your AMATEUR license doesn't authorize you to transmit
outside the HF amateur bands.

That aside, I have little interest in the
modes other radio services use.

Of course you don't...you are a smug, arrogant Extra class
AMATEUR.

You don't seem to give a **** about "the pool of trained
operators" (in amateur radio) for national needs, only
your own. Since morse code is all but DEAD in all other
US radio services, that "pool of trained" morsemen is so
much ARRL propaganda. The rest of the radio world just
does NOT need morsemen. Try...TRY to get used to it.

What's it to you, Len?

NOTHING "in it" for me, pedantic Prussian literalist. It's
just a thing to MODERNIZE a HOBBY radio activity. Most of the
other radio services in the USA have been modernized, but
amateur radio has been (mostly) stuck in the standards and
practices of the 1930s.

You aren't a radio amateur and you aren't likely to be one.

Hey, pedantic Prussian literalist, go auto-fornicate.

I MIGHT get an amateur radio license later and I MIGHT NOT.
It's NOT up to YOU to decide whether I can or can't.
Don't let your smug, arrogant Prussian attitude go to far
like you did with sentence.

The US amateur radio regulation morse code test was about
GETTING INTO amateur radio via authorized licensing.

Since you've been licensed as an AMATEUR since your teen
years, have you spent all your AMATEUR radio time GETTING
INTO amateur radio? I don't think so.

No matter, pedantic Prussian literalist, the FCC *HAS*
*DECIDED* to END US amateur radio licensing morse code
TESTING. Gone, finito, adieu, bye-bye to it as soon as
the R&O is published in the Federal Register giving the
legal END to that testing.

... I made a number of 160m
contacts last night with Nordic and Russian radio amateurs. We used CW.
I do hope that's okay with you. Perhaps we should have thought to
check.

You can do anything LEGAL that you want. It's not up to me
to DICTATE what others do or don't do, what opinions one
"should have" or "should not have." You might reflect on
the latter since you are ALWAYS "telling me" what attitudes
I "should have." * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

BTW, did any of those Nordic and Russian amateurs have French
amateur radio licenses too? Did you check THEIR authorized
operating privileges?

No one involved had tossed the Morse Code into any dumpster.

The FCC *IS* going to toss morse code TESTING in the big
federal dumpster. They already announced it. All it takes
is to add the final effective date and publish that in the
Federal Register. [ain't that sumthin' tho?]


Wow! In Scouting! Oh, my, I was never in the Scouts.

I have no trouble believing that.

Tsk, you ALWAYS have "trouble believing" whatever I write,
yet you make a Big thing of "believability" when you see
some opening to "win" message points. :-)

My uniform was REAL and the first duty was "closing with
and destroying the enemy." shrug

My Cub Scout and Boy Scout uniforms were very real. One could see and
touch them. We didn't receive any instructions on closing with and
destroying any enemy.

No Primary Duty of soldiering? Tsk, tsk, the Scouts were
originally formed to BE devoted to uniforms, organization,
survival in the wilderness just like the troops of the Boer
War. Scouting has since changed to be more of a social
organization with lots of fundamental skills that CAN be
gained (but are not absolutely required).

Come to think of it, I never received any instructions from the Air
Force about my duty to close with and destroy any enemies.

Tsk, try to be honest about "your time" in the USAF. Enlisted
specialists were NOT taught-trained-exercised as land soldiers.
During the 1960s. I've seen too many of them of the 50s and
60s to believe they could ever soldier in the field.

I put you down as just another braggart REMF who wants to
IMPLY he was "in combat" but never was. Just like Robesin
and his "seven hostile actions." I.e., bull****.

In your time
in the Army, did you ever close with and/or destroy any enemy, Len?

No, I was never "closing with or destroying any enemy" from
March 1952 through February 1956. What's it to you, Heil?

I voluntarily enlisted in the US Army in March 1952 and
didn't get assigned to the Far East until January 1953.
"Permanent truce" in Korea was established in July 1953.
Did you expect me to violate the UCMJ and go AWOL to Korea
in order to "fight?"

I stayed where assigned by orders, did my duty. That's all
explained in my photo essay mentioned earlier. I have NO
problem with explaining what I did and what I worked on and
when in Japan during my Army enlistement. But, YOU have a
great deal of "trouble" is going into ANY detail about
exactly what you did and where. Typical REMF "military
career explanation" just like the Robesin.

Yes, I was assigned to a REAR AREA. You could label me as
a "RE-F" since my sexual partners hadn't - to the best of my
knowledge - been mothers yet. But, that REAR AREA duty that
was mine involved HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS...and
VHF, UHF, and microwave radio communications. Concentration
was on transmitters but also involved receivers.

I won't bother asking the pedantic Prussian literalist what
HE did "during the war" as another REMF. He hasn't said and
I don't think he will ever say what it was. Typical of the
smug, arrogant "I am always better than you extra class."

... I never received any Morse Code training in the Air
Force either, though I passed a Morse Code receiving test as a part of
my Bypassed Specialist exams.

That's what you SAY but somehow it rings false and always has.
USAF enlisted 'specialists" of the 50s and 60s were NOT some
kind of radio-electronics whizzes in the REAR AREAS. Most
of the enlisted ranks were simply trying to get OUT of being
soldiers on land where the enemy was trying to kill them.

Tell us all about the strong, mighty, virile warriors of
the USAF enlisted ranks of the 50s and 60s and how they
conquered the (radio) airwaves then? By the time of the
ending of the draft in 1973, the USAF had to smarten-up
and start to make the enlisted ranks be a lot better than
the draft-dodging dummies doing their time before then.
As a civilian engineer in the 60s through now, I've seen
the USAF improve their technical smarts a great deal.
But, before the end of the draft, the USAF enlisted smarts
were akin to the AMATEUR hobbyist level of experience in
their 'specialties." That's just how it was, Vietnam REMF.


I never had to learn any morsemanship in 1952, 1962, 1972,
1982, 1992, 2002...for work or play. shrug

You don't have to learn any now.

Riiiight. Between 1952 and time now I NEVER had to learn or
use morse code as a PROFESSIONAL *OR* as a hobbyist. That's
a 54-year span of time. That's operating a transmitter
LEGALLY in the EM spectrum from VLF to about 25 GHz, all the
decade-wide sections of the spectrum.

Let's call it one more thing that I know and that you don't.

Let's call it the *ONLY* thing in radio-electronics that
You "know more than I"...as a MORSEMAN on the AMATEUR bands,
using a morse code that has been relatively unchanged since
1844 (162 years ago).

That "Extra right out of the box" has certainly given you more trouble,
hasn't it?

No "trouble" at all. I haven't pursued it in the last six
years. I lost interest in getting a legal amateur radio
license four decades ago. Who needed morse code in the
1960s? Only the Recreationists trying to copy the "radio
pioneering of the 1920s and 1930s using an already out-of-
date mode. Hardly any sort of "advancing the state of the
communications art" was it?

Many of us have more experience than you in commercial, military or
governmental HF radio operations. Live with it.

News Flash, pedantic Prussian: That "us" does NOT include YOU.

Besides, to toss the literalist stuff right back in your face,
"commercial, military or governmental HF radio operations" is
NOT AMATEUR RADIO! :-)

Live with THAT! :-)


I'd already worked three years on spanning the Pacific Ocean
on HF. With Big radio equipment. Amateur stuff would
somehow "teach me" such things via a federal amateur license?

Yes, Len, it could have.

How in the HELL do YOU know? You really need to download my
photo essay and examine what was pictured and what I wrote.

Tell us all about the SEMICONDUCTOR-based equipment that ham
radio was using in the 1950s and how "I could have learned from
(getting a ham license)" back then? You speak BULL****.


Big Dave is the Mighty Macho Morseman...unstoppable in his
refusual to recognize others having a different opinion
than his godly wisdom...

You don't react well to folks who don't share your opinions, Len.
Google and the FCC electronics records are loaded with examples of how
you react.

Google archives are LOADED WITH EXAMPLES of "how badly YOU
react" to those that don't meet your versions of What Should
Be in US amateur radio. Pedantic Prussianism, literally
quoted from the publications of the ARRL.

My correspondence with the FCC is a matter of public record
and are strongly worded AGAINST morse code testing. In those
public records (which include the "electronic" archives...
actually magnetic archives) you will find that I do NOT
think the FCC's rulings should be to appease the emotional
hunger of the rabid amateur morsemen determined to keep
code testing forever and ever.


Nobody can tell Big Leonard what to do.

YES they can...and DO. You've been trying to do it for years!

When the Morse Code exam is
removed, you'll still be trying to open the box holding that Extra ticket.

What "box?" What "ticket?"

I've acquired three other FCC licenses in my time and still
pursue a hobby of electronics and radio in retirement. I am
secure in what I am and what I know. I've made a good living
in radio-electronics over the last half century and don't need
more "licenses." I sure as hell don't need to take up an on-off
code "skill" that's been around for 162 years...and then DROPPED
by ALL other radio services (if they ever considered morse code
to begin with)!

My object in here was to advocate the ELIMINATION of the code
exam. Except for the legal posting in the Federal Register,
THAT ELIMINATION HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED! Learn to live with it.


["into the valley of dearth rode the four hundred..."]

How many? Is this quote another of your factual errors?

Note the spelling of the word DEARTH. That's called a play
on words. A bit of HUMOR, a subject that has eluded your
correspondence in here.

Humorless pedantic Prussian literalists have GREAT difficulty
with any sort of humor or even whimsy. Try to accept that.
The no-code-test advocates aren't all hidebound to keep code
testing forever and ever, always marching in ranks to the
morse drumbeat under the direction of the ARRL old folks.

But, the humorless pedantic Prussian literalist will be always
on the lookout for "errors" and chastize those who don't think
as He does...then berate them for not being as good as He is.

FCC 06-178 is almost LAW. That's a fact of amateur radio
life for those seeking a hobby radio activity. Too bad for
the adamant pro-coders busy sneering and insulting all the
no-coders. But, times change, new laws will come in to
change the lives of some. The pro-coders have had their
emotional sustenance long enough. Now its time for THEM to
Get Off Federal Welfare and be good hobbyists of modern
times.

David, to you as always * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

8.544,

" wrote in
oups.com:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...y/My3Years.pdf


Hey Len,

The link wouldn't work for me.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...y/My3Years.pdf


Hey Len,

The link wouldn't work for me.

Please accept my apologies for omitting a part of the link...here is
correct one:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf

If you try just to the 'BroadcastHistory' part you will see a page
of
lots and lots of information on what was originally a site for
"Saving History from the Dumpster." My upload is under the
"Military
Radio" link where I've got a few other uploads besides the one
above.

BTW, Hallikainen himself is a ham. :-)

LA

" wrote in
oups.com:

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

I submit that many entered the "Big Leagues of HF Radio" about the same
time as you. You are but one of them.

You betcha, but, as far as I can find, the ONLY one who
posted a photo essay (20 pages worth) about it on the
Internet. See:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...y/My3Years.pdf

So, how do you feel that a station with 40+ transmitters
all at 1 KW MINIMUM RF output on HF is "NOT Big Time?"
How do you feel over 200,000 messages per month sent is
"NOT Big Time?" How do you feel that a Signal Battalion
directly attached to an area headquarters is "NOT Big
Time?" Kiss my yes.

Wow, you think being IN the Department of State comms "IS"
a bigger time? Of course you do. ANYTHING you do is
(in your words here) bigger and better than what anyone
else in here has done, ever...

You are the only one of them comparing learning the Morse Code to an
"AUTISTIC TALENT".

Sorry, sweetums, but I'm the SECOND one intimating that
the "talent" is so. Have you forgetten the words of "John
Smith" (another Angeleno) so quickly? Of course you will.
You ALWAYS try to "blame" someone else as "being in error"
whenever they disagree with you.

As with so many other things you've written here, you are in error.

Hey, Davie boy, in the immortal words of the ByteBrothers,
* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

Typing in
capital letters and adding a "Tsk, tsk" here and there don't make your
views true.

Being the archtypical Prussian pedantic literalist who
only "obeys orders" of directives from the ARRL does NOT
make YOU "true," sweetie.

You are one HUMORLESS buzzard whose skin is SO thin that
it rivals the shaving thickness from a microtome output.


Leonard, I have little doubt that once all of the smoke clears away,
you'll still be attempting to open the box containing your Extra Class
amateur radio license.

So, other than you and Jimmie Noserve, who gives a ****?

I got my PROFESSIONAL radio operator license in 1956 and
used it. I got my (no test whatsoever) CB license in
1959 and used it. I got my COMMERCIAL PLMRS station
license in the 80s (as co-owner but responsible for
technical operation) and used it.

Are you going to say that an AMATEUR radio license is
"more Big Time" than what I've gotten already? That I
MUST have a ham license from the FCC to prove my strength,
force, agility, and intelligence MORE than a whole career
IN the radio-electronics industry?!?

Of course you do! Anyone who has done less than you is
always the lesser in your comments.

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !


If you want to wave a metaphor, make certain that it is a valid one.

Oh! YOU are the Guardian of English as she are wrote?

Of course you are! You ALWAYS "correct" others' "mistakes"
since they are always lesser than YOU.

Tsk, you should be writing in Hunnish...of which you claimed
to be a Master once in another of your petulant, ****ed-off
rants at me. :-)

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !


Finally, CW is consigned to the trash heap with sword
swallowing--CW, a skill whose time has come, and gone ...

Sorry, "John", Morse Code is not being consigned to any trash heap.
It is used daily in making thousands of contacts by radio amateurs.

Really? I thought RADIOS were needed first...?

Your juvenile behavior is showing, Leonard.

Tsk, tsk, the pedantic Prussian literalist, in his smug
arrogance, cannot recognize SARCASM?

You mean that ALL one needs is closing and opening a circuit in
the proper morse manner? Wow! What a mode!

If that's what you come away with after reading a sentence which
includes the words "by radio amateurs", so be it.

Poor baby, unable to recognize SARCASM and you start in on
another fabricated finger-pointing? "Bad form, old man."

Tell us what OTHER radio services still use morse code for
communications. [that should be easy...there ain't none]

It is then peculiar that I'm still hearing aviation beacons which use
Morse Code.

What, the old pre-WW2 "A-N" beacons on LF? Good grief,
Snoopy, those aren't being used by Real pilots these days.

If you mean VOR or ILS with the periodic morse code tone
identifier, those ARE being used in civil aviation. But,
the VOR isn't called a "beacon" and the ILS certainly isn't
one of those. The 75 MHz marker beacons are "beacons" but
they do NOT have any morse identifier, just a constant AM
tone denoting Outer, Middle, or Inner beacon.

Your AMATEUR license does NOT authorize you to transmit in
the Aviation Radio Services.

I hear utility stations in the HF bands using Morse Code for two way
communication.

Then feel free to listen to those "utility stations" and
enjoy what they have to say, if anything comprehensible to
you. Your AMATEUR license doesn't authorize you to transmit
outside the HF amateur bands.

That aside, I have little interest in the modes other radio services
use.

Of course you don't...you are a smug, arrogant Extra class
AMATEUR.

You don't seem to give a **** about "the pool of trained
operators" (in amateur radio) for national needs, only
your own. Since morse code is all but DEAD in all other
US radio services, that "pool of trained" morsemen is so
much ARRL propaganda. The rest of the radio world just
does NOT need morsemen. Try...TRY to get used to it.

What's it to you, Len?

NOTHING "in it" for me, pedantic Prussian literalist. It's
just a thing to MODERNIZE a HOBBY radio activity. Most of the
other radio services in the USA have been modernized, but
amateur radio has been (mostly) stuck in the standards and
practices of the 1930s.

You aren't a radio amateur and you aren't likely to be one.

Hey, pedantic Prussian literalist, go auto-fornicate.

I MIGHT get an amateur radio license later and I MIGHT NOT.
It's NOT up to YOU to decide whether I can or can't.
Don't let your smug, arrogant Prussian attitude go to far
like you did with sentence.

The US amateur radio regulation morse code test was about
GETTING INTO amateur radio via authorized licensing.

Since you've been licensed as an AMATEUR since your teen
years, have you spent all your AMATEUR radio time GETTING
INTO amateur radio? I don't think so.

No matter, pedantic Prussian literalist, the FCC *HAS*
*DECIDED* to END US amateur radio licensing morse code
TESTING. Gone, finito, adieu, bye-bye to it as soon as
the R&O is published in the Federal Register giving the
legal END to that testing.

... I made a number of 160m
contacts last night with Nordic and Russian radio amateurs. We used
CW. I do hope that's okay with you. Perhaps we should have thought to
check.

You can do anything LEGAL that you want. It's not up to me
to DICTATE what others do or don't do, what opinions one
"should have" or "should not have." You might reflect on
the latter since you are ALWAYS "telling me" what attitudes
I "should have." * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

BTW, did any of those Nordic and Russian amateurs have French
amateur radio licenses too? Did you check THEIR authorized
operating privileges?

No one involved had tossed the Morse Code into any dumpster.

The FCC *IS* going to toss morse code TESTING in the big
federal dumpster. They already announced it. All it takes
is to add the final effective date and publish that in the
Federal Register. [ain't that sumthin' tho?]


Wow! In Scouting! Oh, my, I was never in the Scouts.

I have no trouble believing that.

Tsk, you ALWAYS have "trouble believing" whatever I write,
yet you make a Big thing of "believability" when you see
some opening to "win" message points. :-)

My uniform was REAL and the first duty was "closing with and
destroying the enemy." shrug

My Cub Scout and Boy Scout uniforms were very real. One could see and
touch them. We didn't receive any instructions on closing with and
destroying any enemy.

No Primary Duty of soldiering? Tsk, tsk, the Scouts were
originally formed to BE devoted to uniforms, organization,
survival in the wilderness just like the troops of the Boer
War. Scouting has since changed to be more of a social
organization with lots of fundamental skills that CAN be
gained (but are not absolutely required).

Come to think of it, I never received any instructions from the Air
Force about my duty to close with and destroy any enemies.

Tsk, try to be honest about "your time" in the USAF. Enlisted
specialists were NOT taught-trained-exercised as land soldiers.
During the 1960s. I've seen too many of them of the 50s and
60s to believe they could ever soldier in the field.

I put you down as just another braggart REMF who wants to
IMPLY he was "in combat" but never was. Just like Robesin
and his "seven hostile actions." I.e., bull****.

In your time
in the Army, did you ever close with and/or destroy any enemy, Len?

No, I was never "closing with or destroying any enemy" from
March 1952 through February 1956. What's it to you, Heil?

I voluntarily enlisted in the US Army in March 1952 and
didn't get assigned to the Far East until January 1953.
"Permanent truce" in Korea was established in July 1953.
Did you expect me to violate the UCMJ and go AWOL to Korea
in order to "fight?"

I stayed where assigned by orders, did my duty. That's all
explained in my photo essay mentioned earlier. I have NO
problem with explaining what I did and what I worked on and
when in Japan during my Army enlistement. But, YOU have a
great deal of "trouble" is going into ANY detail about
exactly what you did and where. Typical REMF "military
career explanation" just like the Robesin.

Yes, I was assigned to a REAR AREA. You could label me as
a "RE-F" since my sexual partners hadn't - to the best of my
knowledge - been mothers yet. But, that REAR AREA duty that
was mine involved HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS...and
VHF, UHF, and microwave radio communications. Concentration
was on transmitters but also involved receivers.

I won't bother asking the pedantic Prussian literalist what
HE did "during the war" as another REMF. He hasn't said and
I don't think he will ever say what it was. Typical of the
smug, arrogant "I am always better than you extra class."

... I never received any Morse Code training in the Air
Force either, though I passed a Morse Code receiving test as a part of
my Bypassed Specialist exams.

That's what you SAY but somehow it rings false and always has.
USAF enlisted 'specialists" of the 50s and 60s were NOT some
kind of radio-electronics whizzes in the REAR AREAS. Most
of the enlisted ranks were simply trying to get OUT of being
soldiers on land where the enemy was trying to kill them.

Tell us all about the strong, mighty, virile warriors of
the USAF enlisted ranks of the 50s and 60s and how they
conquered the (radio) airwaves then? By the time of the
ending of the draft in 1973, the USAF had to smarten-up
and start to make the enlisted ranks be a lot better than
the draft-dodging dummies doing their time before then.
As a civilian engineer in the 60s through now, I've seen
the USAF improve their technical smarts a great deal.
But, before the end of the draft, the USAF enlisted smarts
were akin to the AMATEUR hobbyist level of experience in
their 'specialties." That's just how it was, Vietnam REMF.


I never had to learn any morsemanship in 1952, 1962, 1972, 1982,
1992, 2002...for work or play. shrug

You don't have to learn any now.

Riiiight. Between 1952 and time now I NEVER had to learn or
use morse code as a PROFESSIONAL *OR* as a hobbyist. That's
a 54-year span of time. That's operating a transmitter
LEGALLY in the EM spectrum from VLF to about 25 GHz, all the
decade-wide sections of the spectrum.

Let's call it one more thing that I know and that you don't.

Let's call it the *ONLY* thing in radio-electronics that
You "know more than I"...as a MORSEMAN on the AMATEUR bands,
using a morse code that has been relatively unchanged since
1844 (162 years ago).

That "Extra right out of the box" has certainly given you more trouble,
hasn't it?

No "trouble" at all. I haven't pursued it in the last six
years. I lost interest in getting a legal amateur radio
license four decades ago. Who needed morse code in the
1960s? Only the Recreationists trying to copy the "radio
pioneering of the 1920s and 1930s using an already out-of-
date mode. Hardly any sort of "advancing the state of the
communications art" was it?

Many of us have more experience than you in commercial, military or
governmental HF radio operations. Live with it.

News Flash, pedantic Prussian: That "us" does NOT include YOU.

Besides, to toss the literalist stuff right back in your face,
"commercial, military or governmental HF radio operations" is
NOT AMATEUR RADIO! :-)

Live with THAT! :-)


I'd already worked three years on spanning the Pacific Ocean
on HF. With Big radio equipment. Amateur stuff would somehow
"teach me" such things via a federal amateur license?

Yes, Len, it could have.

How in the HELL do YOU know? You really need to download my
photo essay and examine what was pictured and what I wrote.

Tell us all about the SEMICONDUCTOR-based equipment that ham
radio was using in the 1950s and how "I could have learned from
(getting a ham license)" back then? You speak BULL****.


Big Dave is the Mighty Macho Morseman...unstoppable in his
refusual to recognize others having a different opinion than his
godly wisdom...

You don't react well to folks who don't share your opinions, Len.
Google and the FCC electronics records are loaded with examples of how
you react.

Google archives are LOADED WITH EXAMPLES of "how badly YOU
react" to those that don't meet your versions of What Should
Be in US amateur radio. Pedantic Prussianism, literally
quoted from the publications of the ARRL.

My correspondence with the FCC is a matter of public record
and are strongly worded AGAINST morse code testing. In those
public records (which include the "electronic" archives...
actually magnetic archives) you will find that I do NOT
think the FCC's rulings should be to appease the emotional
hunger of the rabid amateur morsemen determined to keep
code testing forever and ever.


Nobody can tell Big Leonard what to do.

YES they can...and DO. You've been trying to do it for years!

When the Morse Code exam is
removed, you'll still be trying to open the box holding that Extra
ticket.

What "box?" What "ticket?"

I've acquired three other FCC licenses in my time and still
pursue a hobby of electronics and radio in retirement. I am
secure in what I am and what I know. I've made a good living
in radio-electronics over the last half century and don't need
more "licenses." I sure as hell don't need to take up an on-off
code "skill" that's been around for 162 years...and then DROPPED
by ALL other radio services (if they ever considered morse code
to begin with)!

My object in here was to advocate the ELIMINATION of the code
exam. Except for the legal posting in the Federal Register,
THAT ELIMINATION HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED! Learn to live with it.


["into the valley of dearth rode the four hundred..."]

How many? Is this quote another of your factual errors?

Note the spelling of the word DEARTH. That's called a play
on words. A bit of HUMOR, a subject that has eluded your
correspondence in here.

Humorless pedantic Prussian literalists have GREAT difficulty
with any sort of humor or even whimsy. Try to accept that.
The no-code-test advocates aren't all hidebound to keep code
testing forever and ever, always marching in ranks to the
morse drumbeat under the direction of the ARRL old folks.

But, the humorless pedantic Prussian literalist will be always
on the lookout for "errors" and chastize those who don't think
as He does...then berate them for not being as good as He is.

FCC 06-178 is almost LAW. That's a fact of amateur radio
life for those seeking a hobby radio activity. Too bad for
the adamant pro-coders busy sneering and insulting all the
no-coders. But, times change, new laws will come in to
change the lives of some. The pro-coders have had their
emotional sustenance long enough. Now its time for THEM to
Get Off Federal Welfare and be good hobbyists of modern
times.

David, to you as always * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

8.544,




Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in

massive rant snipped

Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

Alun,

I don't think Len wants a ham license - with or without a code test. If
he did, he'd have gotten one years or even decades ago.

Way back on January 19, 2000, Len said he was "going for Extra right
out of the box". But he hasn't done so yet - nor obtained any sort of
amateur radio license.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
. ..

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in
ups.com:


I think after the dust settles the big issue will be grandfathering
Novices
and Advanceds to the next class up, i.e. tidying up the licence scheme.
and
of course I still want more phone on 40, 20 and 15, but it will be a
while
before the FCC will get back to these things. Maybe petitions on these
things would be dismissed if they were filed right now, but later on they
might succeed.

As adamant as the FCC has been on this, it's very doubtful that
grandfathering will ever happen. They've made it plain that they consider
it reasonable for people to pass the written tests for the upgrades. In
addition, at the rate the Novice licenses are decreasing they will be all
but gone in less than 10 years anyway.

I tend to agree with that prediction since Novice already had code credit
and the only thing between the Novice and Tech has been the written
test itself. If a Novice hasn't upgraded in the last 5 or 10 years,
odds are they have dropped from the ham radio ranks already.

(SNIP)
I do wonder why this took 3 1/2 years. Maybe the large number of
petitions
(18) and comments (zillions) had something to do with it. Maybe even
Riley
had something to do with delaying it? Does he have that much influence?

73 de N3KIP

I'm firmly convinced that the number of petitions was a major hang-up on
processing this. Each petition had a slightly different spin and each had
a significant number of comments. The FCC staff had to digest all this
and come to an agreement on just what approach would be taken.
Dee, N8UZE

I suspect it is just "low priority" within the FCC's scope of
authority.

Cheers and Happy New Year to all,

My wish for the New Year is that this forum once again become a
place for rational thought and discussion. The personal attacks
and other slimeball commentary by those who know who they are
should end. It is tragic that some people can't abide by simply
repecting the medium and using it in a positive manner.

OK, soapbox mode off :-)

Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
news

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
. ..

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in
ups.com:

[snip]
73 de N3KIP

I'm firmly convinced that the number of petitions was a major hang-up on
processing this. Each petition had a slightly different spin and each
had a significant number of comments. The FCC staff had to digest all
this and come to an agreement on just what approach would be taken.
Dee, N8UZE

I suspect it is just "low priority" within the FCC's scope of
authority.


Yup, I believe that was also a significant factor. It wouldn't surprise me
if the only reasons they got to it now was because the office was slow and
they wanted to clean up some loose ends before the end of the year.

Cheers and Happy New Year to all,


Thanks and same to you.

My wish for the New Year is that this forum once again become a
place for rational thought and discussion. The personal attacks
and other slimeball commentary by those who know who they are
should end. It is tragic that some people can't abide by simply
repecting the medium and using it in a positive manner.


I hope so too.

OK, soapbox mode off :-)

Bill K2UNK


Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
...
Yup, I believe that was also a significant factor. It wouldn't surprise me
if the only reasons they got to it now was because the office was slow and
they wanted to clean up some loose ends before the end of the year.
...
Dee, N8UZE



Like any bureaucracy, the last thing they will do is move to save their
lives. This is what they did here, in a last move and hoping that it is
not too late, they removed the CW test hoping to save the amateur bands
.... they know how to save their jobs!

JS