Brian wrote:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

In article ,
(Brian) writes:


"KØHB" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

"Len Over 21" wrote


Anything said against YOUR PLAN is worthless, illogical,
inconsequential, irresponsible, irrelevant, etc., etc., etc.


I knew you'd agree with me.

73, de Hans, K0HB

I just happen to agree with Hans' plan. Allow the amateur to
distinguish him or herself through actions rather than an FCC forced
march.

While I agree on the generality of that, such is impossible under
the present-day Class Distinction Rules of US amateur radio.

ALL perceived expertise is judged by the "amateur community"
as demonstrated by the fancy-bordered license (suitable for
framing) from the federal government.

The Amateur Extra is the epitome of excellence. Once achieved,
nothing else need be learned. Education ends. You have been
told by his Most High Excellency, the Dill Instructor.

All learning comes through having tiers and tiers of classes, of
distinctions (enforced by law) right along with the social need of
call letters written behind the name to signify a "title" all may see
(and admire, respect) as if it is a dukedom, barony, or other
noble rank. That is VERY IMPORTANT. Do not criticize any
statements of the ruling classes of the "community."

US amateur radio seems to have ceased being a hobby, an
avocational activity done for personal recreation. It has become a
LIFESTYLE...a True Belief.

cut to stock shot of Rod Serling and signpost up ahead, voice
sign-off by Rod...up theme and take black...

LHA


And poor Mike is getting beat up for saying the W1AW signal was too wide.

It has to be me! 8^)

I've done enough post testing on this to be pretty sure that it isn't
me though.

The Waterfall screen in Digipan functions pretty nicely as a poor man's
analyzer. The signal was putting "crap" all over the place.

I wasn't the only person who noticed the problem.

I was not able to duplicate anything like the problem with the RTTY
contest, which had many strong signals, and should have been worse if my
reciever was overloading. I'm impressed with how nicely the old 745
performs.

The problem - whatever it was - was in the W1AW signal.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike,

It seems to me that the bandwidth calculations given for CW are based
on 'true' CW - that is, carrier on / off operation.

I wonder if W1AW pre-records their CW material in audio format, then
broadcasts it as a modulated SSB signal - would that not stretch the
signal bandwidth out considerably?

Anyone know if this might be the case?

73, Leo


On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:00:37 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

snip

It has to be me! 8^)

I've done enough post testing on this to be pretty sure that it isn't
me though.

The Waterfall screen in Digipan functions pretty nicely as a poor man's
analyzer. The signal was putting "crap" all over the place.

I wasn't the only person who noticed the problem.

I was not able to duplicate anything like the problem with the RTTY
contest, which had many strong signals, and should have been worse if my
reciever was overloading. I'm impressed with how nicely the old 745
performs.

The problem - whatever it was - was in the W1AW signal.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"KØHB" wrote in message thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote


FCC or somebody would have to keep a
database of everyone who had held one and let it expire without upgrading,
to insure that someone wouldn't retest and get a second one.

No more than FCC or somebody kept a similar database to prevent ex-licensees
from glomming onto a Novice permit back in the 1950's.

I think people had more respect for the FCC and its R&R back then,
Hans. Just IMHO.

And i'm not "insisting" on it, just pointing out some of the possible
problems. I think the best solution might be to have it nonrenewable,
but if someone *really* wants another one, they can take the exam
again after the first one expires. Just a thought.

A false application
today is just as unlikely as a false application 50 years ago, and I suspect
the penalties are similar.

I hope you're right.

And why bother --- after 10 years of experience, the standard exam would be
a laugher.

That's what I thought back in 1968. I was amazed that there was so
much
moaning and groaning and complaining from *experienced* hams about
having to take another license test......

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message thlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

(snip) Amateur Radio as a service is
gone. It is only self serving now. Not
a service but a high priced hobby.
After all, it is called the Amateur
Radio Service.


First, you're obviously confused about the word "service." In FCC
terminology, "service" refers to a group of frequencies meant to serve a
particular purpose for the users of those frequencies, not anything done by
the users of those frequencies. As a result, we have the Amateur Radio
Service, Radio Broadcast Services, Cable TV Relay Service, Maritime Service,
Personal Radio Services, Citizens Band Radio Service, Fixed Microwave
Services, and so on through a long list of other radio services. In other
words, the word "service" in Amateur Radio Service does not refer to any
"service" we might provide to others.

Second, you're completely wrong about "service" being gone within the
Amateur Radio community. Based on what I've seen, I'd estimate as much as
75% of the current operators are involved in some form of public service
related activity in any given year. Of course, the need for our help is
high, meaning even more should become involved, but that hardly suggests the
idea of service is gone today.

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were deleted from
this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Service means just that. Broadcasters have to do public service to
keep broadcastings. Why do you think they do PSA's. No money involved,
they do it free. Amateur operators operate uder the same subset of
rules. If they don't provide a public service when called they have no
reason for being. You also would have to prove that 75% of the
amareurs provide a public service. Lets see, chasing DX, rag chewing
with Barny down the road and checking the weather outside. Yep, thats
sure public service-----NOT!

N2EY wrote:
"KØHB" wrote in message thlink.net...

"N2EY" wrote


FCC or somebody would have to keep a
database of everyone who had held one and let it expire without upgrading,
to insure that someone wouldn't retest and get a second one.

No more than FCC or somebody kept a similar database to prevent ex-licensees
from glomming onto a Novice permit back in the 1950's.


I think people had more respect for the FCC and its R&R back then,
Hans. Just IMHO.

And i'm not "insisting" on it, just pointing out some of the possible
problems. I think the best solution might be to have it nonrenewable,
but if someone *really* wants another one, they can take the exam
again after the first one expires. Just a thought.


A false application
today is just as unlikely as a false application 50 years ago, and I suspect
the penalties are similar.


I hope you're right.


And why bother --- after 10 years of experience, the standard exam would be
a laugher.


That's what I thought back in 1968. I was amazed that there was so
much
moaning and groaning and complaining from *experienced* hams about
having to take another license test......


Some might object to having to take and pay for another test. esp if
they are qrp operators.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Some might object to having to take and pay for another test. esp if
they are qrp operators.


Yes, I can see where that would be an almost insurmountable problem among
cheapskate hams. After all, it works out to
$0.002739726027397260273972602739726 per day for the term of the license.
That's a HUGE number!

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


Some might object to having to take and pay for another test. esp if
they are qrp operators.



Yes, I can see where that would be an almost insurmountable problem among
cheapskate hams. After all, it works out to
$0.002739726027397260273972602739726 per day for the term of the license.
That's a HUGE number!

Some might have to take off from work to take the test. Some may have
to drive long distances to take it. I drove 70 miles each way for my
Tech license, and 150 each way for my General, I took the Element 1 in
my home town, and my Extra in a town 50 miles away, because they were on
dates that I could get away.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Some might have to take off from work to take the test. Some may have
to drive long distances to take it. I drove 70 miles each way for my
Tech license, and 150 each way for my General, I took the Element 1 in
my home town, and my Extra in a town 50 miles away, because they were on
dates that I could get away.


Life's a bitch and then you die and they give your callsign away.

73, de Hans, K0HB

In article , "Steve Stone"
writes:

That deemphasis has already occurred. The no-code tech was instituted in
the late 1980s and the code for the higher classes was dropped to only
5wpm
in 2000. There is no need for further deemphasis. Particularly when the
stated reason was attract technically inclined people. That hasn't
happened
so the reason for deemphasis has been proven to be invalid.


Get the foul mouthed red necked yahoos off of HF and I'll consider wasting
my time to learn CW to meet and exceed your criteria.

What mode are those "foul mouthed yahoos" using? It isn't CW.....

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Leo
writes:

I wonder if W1AW pre-records their CW material in audio format, then
broadcasts it as a modulated SSB signal - would that not stretch the
signal bandwidth out considerably?

Yes, but that's not how it's done.

Anyone know if this might be the case?

Here's how it was when I visited in 1993:

The W1AW main transmitters are Harris transceivers and amplifiers, all computer
controlled from a master console in the little building out in front of Hq.
Bulletin and code practice texts are sent over the network from the
headquarters building and the local computer keys all the rigs simultaneously.
(Text-to-Morse conversion is done in the local computer).

Of course a faulty command from the computer, a bad cable or problem in one of
the "professional grade" rigs could wreak all kinds of havoc.

But they don't feed audio into the rigs for Morse or RTTY.

73 de Jim, N2EY

KØHB wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Some might have to take off from work to take the test. Some may have
to drive long distances to take it. I drove 70 miles each way for my
Tech license, and 150 each way for my General, I took the Element 1 in
my home town, and my Extra in a town 50 miles away, because they were on
dates that I could get away.



Life's a bitch and then you die and they give your callsign away.

Sure enough! But.... Lenover21 is right about one thing.

From Lenover21:
Anything said against YOUR PLAN is worthless, illogical,
inconsequential, irresponsible, irrelevant, etc., etc., etc.

Back to me:

If I were a qrp'er, I would surely be peeved under the circumstances.
Heck if I were to be happy with 50 Watts power, I probably wouldn't be
too happy about the situation, having to retest or lose my license.

Perhaps it would be better if everyone were to just tell you that the
plan was the best thing they ever saw?

- Mike KB3EIA -

N2EY wrote:

In article , "Steve Stone"
writes:


That deemphasis has already occurred. The no-code tech was instituted in
the late 1980s and the code for the higher classes was dropped to only

5wpm

in 2000. There is no need for further deemphasis. Particularly when the
stated reason was attract technically inclined people. That hasn't

happened

so the reason for deemphasis has been proven to be invalid.


Get the foul mouthed red necked yahoos off of HF and I'll consider wasting
my time to learn CW to meet and exceed your criteria.


What mode are those "foul mouthed yahoos" using? It isn't CW.....

That I believe, would be foul fisted. 8^)

I'm having trouble grasping the logic that says to effect: "I don't like
the way people talk, so I won't communicate with the people that don't
use voice"

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote

What mode are those "foul mouthed yahoos" using? It isn't CW.....

Jim obviously isn't a DX'er, or he'd know about the infamous "pileup police"
shenanigans regularly heard around 14.023 +/-. I could send you some .wav
files that aren't even fit to air on rrap.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Perhaps it would be better if everyone were to just tell you that the
plan was the best thing they ever saw?


A lot of people have told me exactly that, but I'm sure there are some who
share your view that I'm out to lunch. Life's a bitch, and then I'll die
and they'll give my call sign away.

73, de Hans "He's not a nice man", K0HB

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Unfortunately, I believe I have heard
the story of which Jim speaks...or at
least one exactly like it. (snip)


Okay, I'll try one more time. Please read back over what I've said.
Nothing was said by me about a denial of license based on other grounds. We
were talking about license testing and everything I said had to do with
license testing. What does Jim's story have to do with license testing?
Instead, not able to respond to the actual question raised (character
testing within the license tests), Jim has deceitfully, but clearly
successfully, introduced another subject (denial of license) to undermine my
earlier statements about license testing.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Bert Craig" wrote:

I hate to say it, Jim, but this is one
of those intangibles that fall under
the catagory of "if you don't get it,
I can't explain it to you."

Kim's got it, but doesn't like it. I
can respect that. Bill's got it too,
but doesn't appear to want to let
on that he's got it. (Broken record
mode: But the FCC..., but the
FCC..., but the FCC...) Dwight?
No comment.


Excuse me, Bert. Before you continue discussing whether I "get" something
or not, read back over what I've actually said and notice that absolutely
none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the separate issue raised by
Jim. We were talking about license testing. My comments had to do with
license testing. Jim changed the subject to license denial based on other
grounds. I've made no comments on that subject.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense. What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service? Or the Family Radio Service? Or what public service,
especially free public service, is provided by the radio services used by
business, commerce, or industry?


(snip) You also would have to prove
that 75% of the amareurs provide a
public service. Lets see, chasing DX,
rag chewing with Barny down the
road and checking the weather
outside. Yep, thats sure public
service-----NOT!


After reading that, it is obvious you have no intent to honestly discuss
the issue. And, since I have no desire to provide you with an opportunity to
spread misinformation, I will refrain from further comment.

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were again deleted
from this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message thlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense. What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service? Or the Family Radio Service? Or what public service,
especially free public service, is provided by the radio services used by
business, commerce, or industry?


(snip) You also would have to prove
that 75% of the amareurs provide a
public service. Lets see, chasing DX,
rag chewing with Barny down the
road and checking the weather
outside. Yep, thats sure public
service-----NOT!


After reading that, it is obvious you have no intent to honestly discuss
the issue. And, since I have no desire to provide you with an opportunity to
spread misinformation, I will refrain from further comment.

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were again deleted
from this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Well sir, you perhaps need to do a little research so you can discuss
this subject. I do see you are well educated but the comments from you
are not entirely correct. The 3 above mentioned groups PAY for their
priviledge. Check the rules. Broadcasters have to do public service as
do hams when called. My last comment on this subject as you will
believe what you will. Kinda figures. A fairly new TECH class ham with
all the answers. Come back 30 years from now and we will talk then. Of
course you will still have that TECH that came out of a corn flakes
box. Not a real Amateur ticket.

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

What does Jim's story have to do with license testing?

Simple.

It shows that the FCC has very wide authority to set license test criteria,
including
such concepts as "character" and "discipline". Merely passing the tests is not
the only requirement for a license grant.

Normally the FCC assumes that all applicants for a ham license are "of good
character" unless there is a reason to suspect differently.

I think FCC could indeed legally implement Hans' one-shot learner license with
its upgrade-or-out provision. Their argument would be that someone who was a
ham for 10 years and yet c/wouldn't pass the full-privs test simply didn't have
the required "character" or "discipline" to stay in the ARS.

73 de Jim, N2EY

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article k.net, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote

What mode are those "foul mouthed yahoos" using? It isn't CW.....

Jim obviously isn't a DX'er,

That's right. Never claimed to be.

or he'd know about the infamous "pileup police"
shenanigans regularly heard around 14.023 +/-. I could send you some .wav
files that aren't even fit to air on rrap.

Sad. Very sad. Guess I'll not be a DX'er, either.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message thlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense. What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service? Or the Family Radio Service? Or what public service,
especially free public service, is provided by the radio services used by
business, commerce, or industry?

I'll play a bit of "Devil's Advocate" here, Dwight...There are
some very well respected REACT teams utilizing GMRS which is,
unfortunately, "Citizen's Band". (ie: Crest REACT in SoCal)

They are far and few between, however, and many of the more
functional REACT Teams have blended Amateur Radio into their teams.

(snip) You also would have to prove
that 75% of the amareurs provide a
public service. Lets see, chasing DX,
rag chewing with Barny down the
road and checking the weather
outside. Yep, thats sure public
service-----NOT!

After reading that, it is obvious you have no intent to honestly discuss
the issue. And, since I have no desire to provide you with an opportunity to
spread misinformation, I will refrain from further comment.

He is, at the very least, predisposed to trying to disparge the
Amateur Service.

Facts undermine his attack, however.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

It should be obvious, Bill. US ham radio is all about "working
DX on HF with CW."

Same old song, huh? You wrote it and you're the only one singing it.
HF amateur radio is many things to many people, but you aren't one of
them.

Thank God for small favors ! ! ! !

73

Steve, K4YZ

"N2EY" wrote



I think FCC could indeed legally implement Hans' one-shot learner license
with
its upgrade-or-out provision. Their argument would be that someone who was
a
ham for 10 years and yet c/wouldn't pass the full-privs test simply didn't
have
the required "character" or "discipline" to stay in the ARS.


Nice try, Jim, but that wouldn't be their argument at all.

Their argument would be that the individual had not yet demonstrated
knowledge of the technical qualifications for a standard license by passing
the required written examination, and their learners permit had expired. It
has nothing to do with "character" or "discipline".

73, de Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote:

It shows that the FCC has very wide
authority to set license test criteria,
including such concepts as
"character" and "discipline". (snip)


Nonsense. It would be virtually impossible to test character or discipline
in a radio license test. The FCC hasn't done it and probably wouldn't ever
attempt to do so. Nice talking to you, Jim.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote:

I hate to say it, Jim, but this is one
of those intangibles that fall under
the catagory of "if you don't get it,
I can't explain it to you."

Kim's got it, but doesn't like it. I
can respect that. Bill's got it too,
but doesn't appear to want to let
on that he's got it. (Broken record
mode: But the FCC..., but the
FCC..., but the FCC...) Dwight?
No comment.


Excuse me, Bert. Before you continue discussing whether I "get"
something
or not, read back over what I've actually said and notice that absolutely
none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the separate issue raised by
Jim. We were talking about license testing. My comments had to do with
license testing. Jim changed the subject to license denial based on other
grounds. I've made no comments on that subject.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

No Dwight, I will not excuse you. The discussion I was engaged in w/Bill,
K2UNK, concerned the "character" aspect of Morse code testing. (i.e.
demonstrating self-discipline by studying for and passing Element 1 for
increased privileges, regardless whether one plans on actually using CW OTA
or not.)

As for discussing whether or not you "get it," again...no comment. No
comment means no comment. You were only included because you were one of
three that commented re. the subject. I do notice that this is not the first
(or tenth, for that matter) time you've joined into a thread, (or a branch
thereof) pulled the subject in a different direction, and then whined about
a response by claiming that what you said had nothing to do with a
"separate" issue. Well Dwight, the above is the issue that Bill, JEP, Kim,
Jim, and I were discussing. Get it yet?

73 de Bert'
WA2SI

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense.

I just love how you so cavalierly proclaim other's opinions and/or
statements as "nonsense." Kim was right on target re. same.

What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service?

Gee, the Office of Homeland Security disagrees with you, Dwight. Should your
statement be labeled as "nonsense" or just plain "ignorant?"

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were again
deleted
from this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).

Good call.

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote:

I'll play a bit of "Devil's Advocate"
here, Dwight... There are some very
well respected REACT teams utilizing
GMRS which is, unfortunately,
"Citizen's Band". (ie: Crest REACT
in SoCal) (snip)


And the efforts of REACT and its members are commendable. However, any
public service performed is informal in nature, not the result of any
regulatory stipulation imposed by the FCC or federal government. There is
nothing in part 95 that mandates public service like that found in part 97.


He is, at the very least, predisposed to
trying to disparge the Amateur Service.

Facts undermine his attack, however.


But he obviously has no desire to listen to, or accept, facts. Therefore,
an ongoing exchange simply isn't worthwhile, and may be counterproductive if
it provides him with a medium to rant against this radio service. Instead,
I'll wait for something worthwhile to respond to, such as an argument that
may be taken seriously by others.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote


Facts undermine his attack, however.


The facts are this: If amateur radio had to justify it's frequency
allocations based only on public service communications (Part 97, SubPart
E), then we'd be QRT on most of our frequencies by midnight tonight.

The amateur radio service, the citizens (band) radio service, the GMRS, the
FRS, the broadcast radio service, and etc., all exist and are allocated
frequencies so long as PICON says they do. PICON is a lot more than just
"public service", and further it is dynamic so any given services "favor"
under PICON is subject to spectrum market forces, and is influenced most
strongly by the "I" and "N" in PICON. As a hypothetical example, if Tom
Ridge decided he needs ("N") some HF spectrum to communicate with air
marshalls, 50KHz each of 75, 40, 30, and 20 meters could disappear from
97.301 in the blink of an eye.

Thus endeth the lesson.

73, de Hans, K0HB

In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

Stebe thinks that the "majority" of U.S. amateur radio activity
is above HF. That must mean that he never listens below 30
MHz. Probably true since all he can do is transmit over-
modulated shouting and hollering about close-order drill below
30 MHz. Hup too tree foah, ya lie, ya lie, ya lie.

Uhhhhh....nope.

And unfortunately for you, your lies ARE archived in this very
forum.

No "lies."

Sucks to be you, Leonard.

Only when I turn on the ShopVac.

The ONLY way one can be "interested in radio" is to get a ham
license and be proficient in morse code...(SNIP)

Oh geeze...Here we go again.

A 1x2 has stated the Word on that: The ONLY way one can be
"interested in radio" is to get a ham license and be a morseman.

That's the Official Word.

Lennie, we're STILL waiting on you to cite the quotes wherein
you've established this opinion.

Observation of the human condition for over a half century.

What's your excuse?

It's certainly not true in MY case, and just one more example of
how you feel free to take liberties with the truth.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...role-playing in a fantasy land is not "reality" nor
is it "truth."

....with extra gold stars
if one was once a member of da murine corpse. Doesn't hurt if
one was a purchasing agent for a small modem and set-top box
company in the "south" for a few months...that counts as "being
in radio engineering!"

And still more silliness.

I never claimed to be an engineer...But I did provide numerous
references from that job that proved you WRONG on numerous occassions.

Never once did you "prove" anything. Your imagination tells only
you that you were "right." Your imagination is WRONG.

I guess that had to hurt, knowing a "non-engineer" had access to
references that took a bite out of your rants...

"Hurt?" Only my sides from laughing. "References" from a weekly
newspaper from Podunk Hollow, TN, hardly counts for anything...


Amateur radio FUN is only "ancilliary" to the U.S. amateur radio
SERVICE. Ham radio is all about wearing a Lifestyle mental
uniform, marching in ranks to the morse drumbeat of the 1930s,
and being ready, willing, able to "take over communications" when
all the commercial/professional infrastructure FAILS in an
emergency? That's the thoughts I see expressed in here.

Again with the "1930's" rant, Lennie?

Call it "transistorized 1930s," Stebe.

Standards and Practices remain the same as 70 years ago.
Imagination of Public Service and self-serving glory are still the
same. If ARRL writes it, all MUST believe, for their words are
sacred.

And in any case your sleight's against Amateur Radio's PROVEN
track record of being able to provide the very emergency services you
claim as "ineffectual" or "irrelevent" are DISproven over and ovr,
even in the 21st Century.

Of course (he said, humoring the mentally ill)...when any disaster
strikes, all the communications infrastructure fails but amateurs can
jump in and save the day. Using morse code, of course.

[try "slight" and "over"...]


There's no "hatred" of the "pros", Lennie. Only PROlific liars
such as yourself. That you claim to have been a "radio" professional
is unfortuante.

Not a "claim," an actual fact...provable through several third-party
sources. You keep trying to say I never worked in the electronics
industry at all. I did. In aerospace since 1956. Got paid for it.

Try to get used to the FACT that I was employed on a regular basis
with several electronic corporations in southern California and did
retire from regular hours' work. Try to get used to the FACT that my
single patent grant is on radio. Try to get used to the FACT that I
was doing big-leagues HF radio communication before you were
born. Try to get used to the FACT that HF communications has
hardly changed in the last half century. Try to get used to the FACT
that I have far more technical knowledge of radio and electronics in
general than you have now.

Or, reject all the facts, ignore reality, and say everything I've written
is "lies." That doesn't make your statement "true." It never will.

It's a wonderful life.

Yes, it is. Too bad you'll die having not known exactly HOW
wonderful it is.

Perhaps. I'm not complaining. Why are you complaining?

I had to sit with the family gathering again to watch "It's A Wonderful
Life." :-) After seeing it so many times, it's still a good motion
picture even if very dated.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, Brian, all the best to you
and your family.

At least there was ONE person in this forum for you to exchange
greetings with. Good for you. No one should be alone for the
holidays. Even creeps like you, Lennie.

Hardly "alone" during the Holidays. Wasn't even here (physically).
An inconvenience to access another's computer to check e-mail,
even if a close relative.

Why do you insist on painting all those imaginary scenarios, trying
to denigrate others?

I don't live in newsgroups nor do I look to the computer to give me
either acceptance or love or respect. Never thought that way since
getting on BBSs the first time 19 years ago. Computer-modem
communications are just another form of communications...just like
radio. You haven't reached that point in understanding this medium
yet...you can holler incessantly that I "lie" and vomit all sorts of bad
names but none of that is "true" anywhere but in your head.

So far you've not been able to "force" me to do anything, not even
with vague "threats" of some sort of veiled physical harm. Acting
the bully in here only demonstrates what bullies do. This isn't a
"personal battleground" that must be totally occupied by your
personal perceived slights/insults/whatever...yet you keep on with
that sort of thing. Ho hum. Boring to most readers. Doesn't work,
can never work...except in the fantasyland withing your head.

Try to remember that you are NOT some high-rank NCO and that
this is NOT some kind of military service. Playing the Dill Sergeant
won't get you out of any pickle you make by your own words.

LHA

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Brian wrote:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

In article ,
(Brian) writes:


"KØHB" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...

"Len Over 21" wrote


Anything said against YOUR PLAN is worthless, illogical,
inconsequential, irresponsible, irrelevant, etc., etc., etc.


I knew you'd agree with me.

73, de Hans, K0HB

I just happen to agree with Hans' plan. Allow the amateur to
distinguish him or herself through actions rather than an FCC forced
march.

While I agree on the generality of that, such is impossible under
the present-day Class Distinction Rules of US amateur radio.

ALL perceived expertise is judged by the "amateur community"
as demonstrated by the fancy-bordered license (suitable for
framing) from the federal government.

The Amateur Extra is the epitome of excellence. Once achieved,
nothing else need be learned. Education ends. You have been
told by his Most High Excellency, the Dill Instructor.

All learning comes through having tiers and tiers of classes, of
distinctions (enforced by law) right along with the social need of
call letters written behind the name to signify a "title" all may see
(and admire, respect) as if it is a dukedom, barony, or other
noble rank. That is VERY IMPORTANT. Do not criticize any
statements of the ruling classes of the "community."

US amateur radio seems to have ceased being a hobby, an
avocational activity done for personal recreation. It has become a
LIFESTYLE...a True Belief.

cut to stock shot of Rod Serling and signpost up ahead, voice
sign-off by Rod...up theme and take black...

LHA


And poor Mike is getting beat up for saying the W1AW signal was too wide.

It has to be me! 8^)

I've done enough post testing on this to be pretty sure that it isn't
me though.

The Waterfall screen in Digipan functions pretty nicely as a poor man's

analyzer. The signal was putting "crap" all over the place.

I wasn't the only person who noticed the problem.

I was not able to duplicate anything like the problem with the RTTY
contest, which had many strong signals, and should have been worse if my
reciever was overloading. I'm impressed with how nicely the old 745
performs.

The problem - whatever it was - was in the W1AW signal.

It's extremely hard to believe that W1AW could ever foul up. They are
so Perfect!

You must have been out of the shack, watching Reality shows too
much!

LHA

In article ,
(JEP) writes:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense. What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service? Or the Family Radio Service? Or what public service,
especially free public service, is provided by the radio services used by
business, commerce, or industry?


(snip) You also would have to prove
that 75% of the amareurs provide a
public service. Lets see, chasing DX,
rag chewing with Barny down the
road and checking the weather
outside. Yep, thats sure public
service-----NOT!


After reading that, it is obvious you have no intent to honestly discuss
the issue. And, since I have no desire to provide you with an opportunity
to
spread misinformation, I will refrain from further comment.

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were again
deleted
from this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Well sir, you perhaps need to do a little research so you can discuss
this subject.

You FAR more than Dwight!

I do see you are well educated but the comments from you
are not entirely correct.

Not only are you incorrect but also (still) anonymous.

The 3 above mentioned groups PAY for their
priviledge. Check the rules.

Which three groups? Broadcasters do NOT "pay for any priviledge [sic]."
Broadcasters exist by selling air time for profit.

Amateur radio, by definition, is a radio activity NOT engaged in for
pecuniary reasons.

Broadcasters have to do public service as
do hams when called.

Nope. The regulations are quite different.

My last comment on this subject as you will
believe what you will. Kinda figures. A fairly new TECH class ham with
all the answers. Come back 30 years from now and we will talk then.

Oh, my, the "experienced" olde-tyme hamme...who remains
anonymous.

I was first licensed 47 years ago...in commercial radio. I was in
military radio (big leagues, not piddly mobile things) over 50
years ago. Do you have the entire 5-volume set of Title 47 C.F.R.
at your disposal? Do you have bookshelves to put them on?
Does your bookshelf have protection from the rain (like having a
real roof overhead)?

Of
course you will still have that TECH that came out of a corn flakes
box. Not a real Amateur ticket.

Oh, no...don't say it...you got Extra on a whim because two CBers
dared you and paid you $250 if you passed, right? :-)

We will call you Broose Two.

LHA

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Unfortunately, I believe I have heard
the story of which Jim speaks...or at
least one exactly like it. (snip)

Okay, I'll try one more time. Please read back over what I've said.
Nothing was said by me about a denial of license based on other grounds. We
were talking about license testing and everything I said had to do with
license testing. What does Jim's story have to do with license testing?
Instead, not able to respond to the actual question raised (character
testing within the license tests), Jim has deceitfully, but clearly
successfully, introduced another subject (denial of license) to undermine my
earlier statements about license testing.

No one in this newsgroup is allowed to maintain a civil debate.

It should be a fact of life in this venue that morse code testing is a
vital necessity to show the strength of character to the Amateur
Community. Has nothing to do with federal regulations. It is all about
mindset and flights of fantasy.

LHA

In article ,
(somebody anonymous) writes:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

(snip) Amateur Radio as a service is
gone. It is only self serving now. Not
a service but a high priced hobby.
After all, it is called the Amateur
Radio Service.


First, you're obviously confused about the word "service." In FCC
terminology, "service" refers to a group of frequencies meant to serve a
particular purpose for the users of those frequencies, not anything done by
the users of those frequencies. As a result, we have the Amateur Radio
Service, Radio Broadcast Services, Cable TV Relay Service, Maritime
Service,
Personal Radio Services, Citizens Band Radio Service, Fixed Microwave
Services, and so on through a long list of other radio services. In other
words, the word "service" in Amateur Radio Service does not refer to any
"service" we might provide to others.

Second, you're completely wrong about "service" being gone within the
Amateur Radio community. Based on what I've seen, I'd estimate as much as
75% of the current operators are involved in some form of public service
related activity in any given year. Of course, the need for our help is
high, meaning even more should become involved, but that hardly suggests
the
idea of service is gone today.

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were deleted from
this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Service means just that.

No. All throughout Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a regulatory
term denoting a type and kind of radio activity.

Broadcasters have to do public service to
keep broadcastings.

It's the law.

Why do you think they do PSA's. No money involved,
they do it free.

Yes, in the wee small hours when their air rates are absolutely lowest.

Amateur operators operate uder the same subset of
rules.

Incorrect. Contact the FCC and have them explain the different
radio services and which Parts are applicable to their radio
service. Copies of all Parts are available free for download from
the US Government Printing Office website (through a link at the
FCC webpage).

If they don't provide a public service when called they have no
reason for being.

Look up the Radio Control Radio Service in Part 95, Title 47 C.F.R.

Absolutely NO "public service" required there...yet the R-Cers
lobbied for and got a whole band of frequencies just for them.

You also would have to prove that 75% of the
amareurs provide a public service.

They do by maintaining a national pool of trained radio operators, aka
Morsemen. This is a vital, necessary public service to save the
world when aliens invade from outer space, disasters incapacitate
all the emergency service infrastructure (only CW can work under
such conditions), and when time machines are invented to transport
all morsemen back to 1917 or 1943 and win foreign wars.

LHA

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message
.com...
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

That gives him absolute permission to behave as an asshole off the
radio. No problem.

Again with the profanities, Lennie?

Len, what's going on here?

There were no outrages when Hans just called someone an a-hole.

It's "noblesse oblige" oriented, Brian. The "upper classes" and
royalty get to swear, vomit profanities, demean and denigrate the
lower classes because they all passed 20 WPM code tests.

It's the blue blood of the ruling amateurs. If you don't admire and
love and cherish their noble accomplishments, they turn blue and
use blue language. None others may do the same to them.

Maybe not blue, it's more like they are inviolate.

Stebe gets all red in the face and insists all are green with envy
for not being able to "radiate RF at great power" somehow
allowed to him alone. He's not yellow, doesn't shirk from trying
(vainly) to defend himself when he pales on thinking he's been
insulted.

Of course, any former E-5 or higher that thinks "asshole" is a
terribly profane word must be of the sissy pink coloring.

It's a gray area...

LHA