From: Leo on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:38:34 -0500

wrote:
From: Leo on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:25:53 -0500
On Feb 9, 2:17?am, " wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:49:50 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:35:00 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:03:16 -0500
On 7 Feb 2007 15:29:04 -0800, wrote:
On Feb 7, 4:40?pm, Leo wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007 03:25:23 -0800, wrote:

So you admit, Len, that FCC did indeed create CB long before 1958.

They created an impractical CB service which would later be replaced
with a far more practical one in '58.

I wonder what part of CB eludes Cranky Spanky's understanding?

"CB" AS IT IS KNOWN *NOW* has been around for 49 years.
Certainly for 48 years since the original ELEVEN METER
CITIZENS BAND's two new allocations were announced later
in 1958. Note: One MUST be SUPER ACCURATE in saying
anything to Cranky Spanky; any approximation will be
punishable by his being on your case for his 7-year
itching. :-)

7 years so far, anyway.....who knows how long he'll go on?

"Til the end of time..." :-)


I can just see L'Enfant Terrible* reading Radio & Television
News magazine in 1958 when it had a feature article on
this new Citizens Band - L'Enfant slams down the magazine
and shouts to the world, "IT WAS ALREADY THERE YOU IDIOTS,
ADMIT IT!!! RADIO AND TELEVISION NEWS IS WRONG! WRONG!
WRONG! AND MAKES FACTUAL ERRORS!!!!!!" Then he stalked off
looking for mommie and a clean pair of training pants.

Heh....I read that same article in an old copy of Radio And Television
News a couple of years ago (an old copy I found at a hamfest).

Of course they were wrong!

Naturally! :-) [even though Radio News (old title) had
been around in 1948...:-) ]

As to the "first" creator of the "walkie-talkie," I found a nice,
detailed description about a Canadian, Donald Hings, VE7BH,
P.Eng, M.B.E., C.M. (Order of Canada to you yanks). I will credit
Hings as the first in 1937. See a web page titled "Walk the Talk,
Talk the Walkie-Talkie" by his grandson.

The Canadian CE-58 that resulted from that commercial portable
transmitter-receiver was about on par with the US SCR-194 and
SCR-195. Big and bulky by today's standards, but good to reach
out lots of miles.

The US SCR-194 (27-52 MHz) and SCR-195 (52-65 MHz) were both
super-regen receivers, modulated oscillator structures, "VFO"
in tuning. The "line" officers of the US Army didn't like
them and invited a group of civilian engineers from Galvin in
Chicago (later Motorola) to observe maneuvers and ask them if
they could come up with something better. The result was the
low-HF SCR-536, the FIRST "handie-talkie" for the US Army.
About 40 thousand were produced. Galvin would later design
and sell the SCR-300 VHF FM backpack portable that went into
battle first in Italy in 1943.

Spanky seems intent on making a Big Deal out of Al Gross.
Probably about the "romance" of "Joan-Elenor spy radios."
Spanky never was in any military and can only get vicarious
thrills out of reading of the mysterious 'black' doings.
Gross did good in his lifetime and did do SOME firsts.
Hings had 75 patents as sole inventor, 5 more a co-inventor.

As to hand-helds ("handie-talkie"), the US Army was first
with the SCR-536 from Motorola. A super-regen and modulated
oscillator was old hat in the late 1940s, having been done
at least 15 years earlier many places. The SCR-536 was a
crystal-controlled superhet receiver with modulated PA from
a crystal-oscillator, some 40 thousand were used until
replaced by the AN/PRC-6. The Gross commercial 460 MHz
handie-talkie is notable only for the fact it went
up that high in frequency when it was introduced. By the
way, Gross' Citizens Band Communications company must have
gone down the tubes by 1957 since he left them then and
went to work for another corporation. One year short of
the 11m CB Order from the FCC.


Houston.....we have a problem.....again......

Technician and Technician Plus together = 351,811 or 49.46%

50% of 711,274 is exactly 355,637 or 3,826 more than 351,811.

If this sissy-fuss wants to keep rolling his "factual error"
rock uphill all the time, let him. [that's a play on words
for all youse who be un-eddycated, about the mythical king
Sisyphus] However, all should be able to get the "sissy-fuss"
moniker since Cranky be da sissy and all fussy-fussy about
"accuracy." :-)

.....don't challenge him at mathematics - he's an expert in that
field!

Maybe you can play his game, and say that you were just approximating?


This homie don' play no games wid him...

If Spanky wants to say that 49.46% is NOT EXACTLY 50% then he
would be technically right, but ten kinds of WRONG on judging
people. Note: Rounding off 49.46% to two integers *IS* 50%!


On the home page of www.hamdata.com is a small block of
licensee numbers for the last 12 months:

New Licensees: 22,006
Expired Licenses: 28,618

Based on that the LOSS in 12 Months = 6,612



Based on that Hamdata delta of 6,612 LOSS in 12 months,
that represents a LOSS of 18 per day in the USA!
[6,612 / 365 = 18.115]

...and never the right one (sigh again)

He has a very, very narrow look-angle on amateur activity,
only as far as his hambuddies are concerned and what he
hears on 40m over his kit-constructed radio.


I can't wait to see N2-D2's flabbergasted response to this
post......and about how wrong you are again.....(sigh)

He was there and tried to do something...looked at it and
said to hell with him, went on to enjoy the weekend.

N2-D2 is a cousin of R2-D2. Cranky isn't related to
C3P0. Has no gold finish regardless. But IS robotic.

Ya know, if one takes an EXACT-frequency color-burst xtal
and puts the oscillations into a 16 flip-flop chain of
dividing by 59,659, the chain output will be
60.000 091 4 Hz. That is off EXACT 60 Hz by 1.5238 PPM.
If that is divided down more for a clock, the clock will
be off only 131.656 mS per day, gaining not quite 1
second per week (actually +0.921594 Sec). Spanky would
jump up and down on such accuracies as "WRONG!" "NOT
FACTUAL!" Or other dumb ****.

My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
Fort Collins, CO. Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
Spanky... There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.

wrote:

My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
Fort Collins, CO. Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
Spanky... There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.

Well, if it isn't Dick Tracy! I think that's about as close to amateur
radio as you'll get.

Dave K8MN

On Feb 11, 10:03�pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
* *My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
* *plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
* *Fort Collins, CO. *Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
* *Spanky... *There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.

Well, if it isn't Dick Tracy! *I think that's about as close to amateur
radio as you'll get.

Dave K8MN

Spanky, spanky! :-)

Little red-hatted morse monkey rattles his tin cup again
after Cranky grinds his organ.

I think Brian is on to something when he asked you about
"visiting a men's room"...

wrote:
On Feb 11, 10:03�pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
� �My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
� �plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
� �Fort Collins, CO. �Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
� �Spanky... �There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.
Well, if it isn't Dick Tracy! �I think that's about as close to amateur
radio as you'll get.

Dave K8MN

Spanky, spanky! :-)

You weren't spanked. You were likened to a well known comic strip
character who also has a wrist radio. That was followed by a statement
which may show me to be prescient.

Little red-hatted morse monkey rattles his tin cup again...

You certainly are.

...after Cranky grinds his organ.

As you've been told, Leonard, there's no one here more cranky than you.

I think Brian is on to something when he asked you about
"visiting a men's room"...

I didn't bring up visiting a men's room, Mr. Cheese (who is Brian?) did.
You seem interested in the topic too. I responded to a post about Post
Office boxes and I was flabbergasted when the talk turned to men's rooms.

Have a nice day.

Dave K8MN

On Feb 12, 4:13 pm, Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

I think Brian is on to something when he asked you about
"visiting a men's room"...

I didn't bring up visiting a men's room, Mr. Cheese (who is Brian?) did.
You seem interested in the topic too. I responded to a post about Post
Office boxes and I was flabbergasted when the talk turned to men's rooms.

You changed the subject to places you've never visited. I'm
flabbergasted that you've never visited a PO Box or the men's room.

On Feb 12, 1:03 pm, "
wrote:
On Feb 11, 10:03?pm, Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:
? ?My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
? ?plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
? ?Fort Collins, CO. ?Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
? ?Spanky... ?There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.

Well, if it isn't Dick Tracy! ?I think that's about as close to amateur
radio as you'll get.

Dave K8MN

Spanky, spanky! :-)

Little red-hatted morse monkey rattles his tin cup again
after Cranky grinds his organ.

I think Brian is on to something when he asked you about
"visiting a men's room"...

And speaks from his rear.

On Feb 12, 6:22�pm, wrote:
On Feb 12, 1:03 pm, "
wrote:





On Feb 11, 10:03?pm, Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:
? ?My Lacrosse radio wrist-watch is accurate to one second
? ?plus/minus per day, thanks to the 60 KHz time signal from
? ?Fort Collins, CO. ?Probably "not good enough" for Cranky
? ?Spanky... ?There's just NO satisfyin' these cry babies.

Well, if it isn't Dick Tracy! ?I think that's about as close to amateur
radio as you'll get.

Dave K8MN

* *Spanky, spanky! * :-)

* *Little red-hatted morse monkey rattles his tin cup again
* *after Cranky grinds his organ.

* *I think Brian is on to something when he asked you about
* *"visiting a men's room"...

And speaks from his rear.

Welp, that sure explains his Brain Farts in here! :-)

:-)

LA

On Feb 12, 12:24�am, "
wrote:
From: Leo on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:38:34 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:25:53 -0500
On Feb 9, 2:17?am, " wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:49:50 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:35:00 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:03:16 -0500
On 7 Feb 2007 15:29:04 -0800, wrote:
On Feb 7, 4:40?pm, Leo wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007 03:25:23 -0800, wrote:

* Technician and Technician Plus together = 351,811 or 49.46%

* 50% of 711,274 is exactly 355,637 or 3,826 more than 351,811.

That's right.

But your claim was that Technicians outnumbered
all other license classes combined.

They don't.

* *If Spanky wants to say that 49.46% is NOT
EXACTLY 50% then he
* *would be technically right,
but ten kinds of WRONG on judging
* *people. *

50.54% is more than 49.46%, Len.

You asked:

"Don't you realize that Technician class is now bigger
than ALL other US license classes combined?"

And I replied:

I don't realize it, because it's not true.

And it isn't.

Note: Rounding off 49.46% to two integers *IS* 50%!

No, Len, it's not.

Rounding off 49.46% to two integers is 49%.

You made another factual error!

On Feb 12, 2:46?am, wrote:
On Feb 12, 12:24?am, "
wrote:





From: Leo on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:38:34 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:25:53 -0500
On Feb 9, 2:17?am, " wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:49:50 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:35:00 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:03:16 -0500
On 7 Feb 2007 15:29:04 -0800, wrote:
On Feb 7, 4:40?pm, Leo wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007 03:25:23 -0800, wrote:

Rounding off 49.46% to two integers is 49%.

Yes it IS! :-)

There, you happy now, ****y little pedant? :-)

Tsk. The things one must do to keep these little a-souls
happy in here... :-(

On 12 Feb 2007 10:09:31 -0800, "
wrote:

On Feb 12, 2:46?am, wrote:
On Feb 12, 12:24?am, "
wrote:





From: Leo on Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:38:34 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:25:53 -0500
On Feb 9, 2:17?am, " wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 19:49:50 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:35:00 -0500
wrote:
From: Leo on Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:03:16 -0500
On 7 Feb 2007 15:29:04 -0800, wrote:
On Feb 7, 4:40?pm, Leo wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007 03:25:23 -0800, wrote:

Rounding off 49.46% to two integers is 49%.

Yes it IS! :-)

There, you happy now, ****y little pedant? :-)

Tsk. The things one must do to keep these little a-souls
happy in here... :-(

You could ask him about rounding 238,000 off to 250,000........

73, Leo